The heaviest caliber you can handle...

[BigJimP]

I think John is making some valid points here ! ( especially with shooters that have some experience - and they are now evaluating guns they may wish to carry..) - or even folks that have a primary tactical gun & now think they want to move on to a different gun or a different caliber...( for any number of reasons....their buddy has one, ammo supply, they read a cool article...)

By suggesting a simple drill / skill test...self evaluation of their skill with that new weapon ...and my hunch is, it will quickly show the shooter how their skill level is impacted by things we all know as experienced shooters - that led us to choose certain weapons for our own needs:

.... "gun fit"...weight, grips, barrel length, etc
.... "Caliber"
.... "Controls"

I think its a good idea / good observation ! ...and no surprise to me, when a shooter's results deteriorate with something like a 10mm over a 9mm probably..../ I get a little slower with a .44 mag over a .357 mag even if they're both 4" N frame S&W's....or even a little drop off with a 5" 1911 in 9mm vs .45 acp.../ and while I'm in my 60's and have been shooting a long time, I still shoot 20,000 rds a yr thru my handguns...and try to stay sharp / deep down, I know what my best options are for speed and accuracy to shoot my best scores.

 

[PetahW]

I thought the 454SRH 7.5 was much worse than my mates T/C Super 16 45-70, even with 300gr hp's.

An SRH never tore up (drawing blood) my middle finger, which was located directly behind the triggerguard, with a trigger stop screw - like the .45-70 Contender did (even with a T/C Muzzle Tamer) with the issue cushion grip (a Walnut grip with a rubber insert on the rear face).


.

 

[Oruglock]

My only point is that if you know how to shoot, sight alignment, trigger control etc ....... anyone should be able to shoot anything short of a 454 Casull and the like.

Lots of reasons why some people can't take a bigger recoil; age, infirmity, small build.

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

One problem with trying to make guidelines for determining which gun is best for you based upon grip and/or speed/power/accuracy is that you also need to use and practice with the guns that are appropriate for a given task.

Shooting action pistol is one thing, self defense may require something else, and a trip to northern Montana forest areas may require something totally different.

I practice double and triple taps with a S&W .460 5-inch barrel X-Frame gun because that's what I feel comfortable with when I'm in certain areas of northern Montana.

Likewise, I also practice with a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan .44 magnum so that I can control and shoot that gun effectively.

Do I carry those daily? No, but I still have to know how to use them.

You need to become proficient with the range of tools (guns) that you're going to use for different situations and not just gauge the appropriateness of a gun by how many shots you can get off fastest against a clock.

As an example, I can certainly shoot more shots rapidly and accurately with a 9mm in a shorter amount of time than I can with the .460 - but a 9mm is NOT a gun I'm going to take on a hike into certain areas of Montana - so how fast I can shoot a 9mm is a moot point in that situation.

My suggestion is that attempting to quantify the appropriate gun using what's best for daily carry or action pistol sports ignores whole other areas of pistol shooting; and that you really need to practice control and accuracy with ANY gun you're going to use including for activities like hunting and defense against dangerous animals.

 

[JohnKSa]

Shooting action pistol is one thing, self defense may require something else, and a trip to northern Montana forest areas may require something totally different.

Correct. There is the underlying assumption that the activities for which one is carrying/using a handgun require the shooter to fire multiple accurate shots in a timely manner.

For shooting applications with no time requirement (or no stressing time requirement) the ability to fire multiple shots without reacquiring/readjusting one's grip on the handgun is not particularly useful. One example of that would be shooting groups from a rest to determine the accuracy potential of the firearm. There's no real time requirement and if you need to readjust your grip on the pistol for each shot, there's no harm done.

However, that said, clearly the requirement to fire multiple accurate shots in the minimum time required is one that is very commonly encountered in both sporting and practical applications involving handguns.

I practice double and triple taps with a S&W .460 5-inch barrel X-Frame gun because that's what I feel comfortable with when I'm in certain areas of northern Montana.

So this test would be good for you. You certainly don't want to have to stop between shots to have to reacquire your grip--that defeats the purpose of double- or triple-tapping. It would also be bad for you to attempt to shoot the second and/or third shot with a grip that is sub-standard due to being jarred loose from the recoil of the first shot.

...so how fast I can shoot a 9mm is a moot point in that situation.

A different person, with different requirements might reasonably make the same observation about rejecting a CO2 air pistol for self-defense.

However, that doesn't mean that the results of the test should be ignored. (i.e. One shouldn't dismiss this by making a statement along the lines of: "I won't carry a CO2 air pistol for self-defense, so I'm not even going to bother with seeing if I can pass this test with my 10mm pistol.")

For one thing, a person shouldn't be confused by a self-proposed false-dichotomy. In my exaggerated example, it should be clear that the person isn't limited to choosing between a 10mm and a CO2 air pistol, just as you aren't limited to choosing between a .460 and a 9mm. There are a range of options in between those two choices.

Once the test highlights a problem, there are a number of approaches that can be taken to solve the problem. The person could consider a different platform, or different grips. The person might embark on a training regime to strengthen their grip and to improve their grip technique. The person might choose to go with lighter loads in the same platform. The person might have a gunsmith perform custom modifications to the gun (porting, for example) to reduce the effects of recoil. Or, one might come up with other creative solutions and/or combine a number of the already mentioned solutions into a custom solution that works in their particular application.

The key is understanding that there's a problem that needs to be addressed in the first place and this test provides a simple way to make that determination.

...attempting to quantify the appropriate gun using what's best for daily carry or action pistol sports...

The test is not a quantitative test nor is it specific to self-defense or action pistol.

It's not a quantitative test because it doesn't provide a measure of how good or bad a gun is, it merely provides a pass/fail determination based on the interaction of a particular weapon system (handgun/caliber/grips) and shooter. So this won't tell you what the best weapon system is for you, it only provides one way to see if a particular weapon system is a bad choice for a particular shooter.

It's not specific to self-defense or action pistol because it doesn't specify the caliber or application, only the requirement to put multiple shots on target with minimum elapsed time. The test will provide results that are relevant for any handgun application that fits that very generic description.

 

[Guv]

Petah,

You are right, that trigger guard can be a real Bugger.

 

[Buzzcook]

Given a 48oz gun I'm fairly comfortable with .357 and 44mag. Those are the two most powerful cartridges I've used.

Less than that and I'm not happy with the .44mag. I lose interest in the .357mag at around 30oz.

 

[cdbeagle]

I bought my first pistol after shooting a few .40's and 9mm's. Shot the 9mm's much better and didn't like the recoil of the .40 so I bought a 9mm. Another reason was 9mm ammo was less expensive so I could practice more. That was eight years ago.

My teenage son has been wanting a 1911 since he was small so two months ago I bought two 1911 .45's for us. I was surprised at how manageable the recoil was. To me it is lighter than a .40. I'm sure it also has to do with the weight and the grip ergonomics. I put thin grips on mine and it fits me better than any of my other handguns. I thought I couldn't find a pistol that fit my hand better than my SP-01 Tactical but I was wrong.

 

[BigJimP]

Don't overlook some really nice 1911's in 9mm as well....it may give you the best of both worlds ( with all the ergonomics of the 1911 )...... I shoot a 5" 1911 in 9mm a lot ....( its cheaper, etc)....

 

[Buzzcook]

BTW, I've always thought the advice to use the heaviest cartridge you can handle was backwards.

You should use the heaviest gun you can comfortably handle, with the lightest cartridge that will do the job.

I think the former advise is based on the one shot scenario. My advice is based on firing many times as accurately as possible.

 

[skizzums]

the largest that I can stay in a 5" circle and feel comfy with is 357s. if I go bigger, I need to really concentrate and slow fire to stay consistent. I would wanna shoot bigger unless I had a really big gun to go with it

 

[Rangerrich99]

"Here's how you can tell if you are shooting more gun/caliber than is prudent for you.

You should be able to take a good shooting grip on the gun and shoot a full cylinder/magazine at a reasonably rapid pace (making good hits) without having to adjust/readjust your grip. If you can't do that then you need to work on your shooting, you need to consider another firearm/caliber combination, or both."

Let me begin by saying that I'm far from an expert shooter, so my questions may reflect that.

That said, when you say, "you should be able to take a good shooting grip . . . and shoot a full/cylinder/magazine at a reasonably fast pace . . ." are we including the draw phase in the total time? and what is the lower limit for "reasonably fast pace"?

For instance, though I'm significantly faster with my 1911 from the draw to the firing of the eighth round than I am with my Ruger GP 100 .357 mag, I am consistently more accurate with the .357 mag. Using a single string with my friend's timer (1911), from the bell, I drew and fired the first round in .51 seconds, and touched off the eighth round at 3.77 seconds. All rounds fell in an approx. 5.5 inch spread, about two inches right and low of point of aim, at ten yards.

Comparatively, with the GP 100, the first round went off at .62 seconds, and the sixth round at 4.48 seconds, but the spread was approx. 4.25 inches, 1.25 inches right and high of POA.

Can that be considered "reasonably fast"? And accurate enough?

Of course, I know that under extreme duress these numbers are probably worthless as any useful sort of measure, and in all probability I won't be shooting under ideal conditions (lighting, wind, etc.). I do tend to be faster and more accurate than most of my buddies, but then all of them are self-taught shooters as well. So I am more than a little curious to hear from more experienced shooters: is that fast enough, or painfully slow?

As for the heaviest caliber handgun I've ever shot: a Freedom Arms .454 Casull. That was about 19 years ago and though I put all 5 rounds in a 6 inch circle at 20 yards, it probably took me over 15 seconds. And now with some kind of arthritic condition in my right wrist, I know I'd never feel confident in a defense situation with that gun in hand. My current limit now is a .44 mag, of the Ruger Super Blackhawk variety. I really enjoy shooting that thing, but I'm not sure I'll ever be very fast with it.

 

[spacecoast]

Depends on the gun and ammo combination. Last weekend I shot a Rapid Fire (5 rounds in 10 seconds or less) 90-4x (two handed) in a match with my S&W 24-3 snubby (.44 special) at 25 yards. Targets used are standard NRA conventional pistol targets. It's not a carry gun, being an N-frame, but it is my nightstand gun. Ammo used for that match was lightly loaded 185 gr. full wadcutters, however I think they would make a pretty good defensive round given their size and shape.

Obviously, the smaller/lighter the gun, the less controllable it is for a given type of ammo. Noise (ear damage) and flash should also factor into the equation, which cause me to rule out .357 and .44 mag for SD or HD. I stick with .44 special or .45 ACP.

 

[JohnKSa]

That said, when you say, "you should be able to take a good shooting grip . . . and shoot a full/cylinder/magazine at a reasonably fast pace . . ." are we including the draw phase in the total time? and what is the lower limit for "reasonably fast pace"?

The focus should be on whether or not you can maintain a proper shooting grip through the entire shot string without having to readjust/reacquire the grip.

The other details (precise speed, accuracy quantification, distance to target, draw included or not, etc.) are important in the sense of how they relate to the specific shooting application you, personally, are training/practicing for, but they aren't that critical to the main point of the test.

The key is that if you can't maintain a proper shooting grip throughout a shot string (shooting reasonably fast and with acceptable accuracy for whatever application you are training for) then you need to understand that your practical performance (combination of time and accuracy) will be significantly degraded.

The point of the thread is that we hear the pat phrase "Pick/carry/use a handgun as powerful as you can handle." all the time, but no one ever provides any practical method for determining exactly what that means. This test is one simple way to test the system that is you, your ammunition and your handgun to see if one or more components of that system need to be changed.

 

[Rangerrich99]

Ah, I gotcha now. Next time I hit the range I'll do some experimenting, and see how well I can hang onto my guns. Might even be fun.

 

[Brotherbadger]

I don't have any problems holding onto a .357, but i don't shoot it enough to really be sure i can fire multiple shots accurately and rapidly. I guess i'll say .45 ACP, simply because i have experience with shooting rapidly and accurately.

 

[Magnum Wheel Man]

JOHN... I agree with a lot of what you said... but you'd be fighting a losing battle to tell all us big strong dudes, that we can't handle that loudenboomer magnum

BTW.. some of what I don't agree with, is sometimes the grip it's self can keep your hand in the right place... point of example, my 454 Casull Alaskan... I have no issues holding a solid grip through an entire cylinder full, but I'm quite sure my times are double ( when you take into account target reacquisition ) over my 44 special ( for example )... along those lines, I don't think one can look at caliber alone... I saw several that said they can handle 357 Magnum... yep... me too, but I'm sure my shooting times with my 4" GP-100 would also be twice as fast, as shots fired with a titanium snubbie, again going back to target reacquisition, so, IMO both package, & grips, can also make a difference...

 

[ligonierbill]

I have less trouble maintaining a proper grip than I have with basic trigger control. I just don't train enough to do that really well. Doesn't matter whether I'm shooting .32 ACP or .40 S&W. Of course, maintaining a good grip on a P32 can be more challenging than a Glock 23.

 

[lee n. field]

The focus should be on whether or not you can maintain a proper shooting grip through the entire shot string without having to readjust/reacquire the grip.

A simple diagnostic of ability to control.

 

[Wishoot]

I can dump a full cylinder of some pretty nasty, snarling, full tilt .357 stuff pretty quickly and accurately. Never timed myself though.