M&P 2.0 compact group sizes?

[alou]

What group sizes are you guys getting with your 9mm 2.0 compacts?

[Gun Geezer]

If I do My part, I can keep them all in the 10 ring on a B8 target at 10 yards.

[hardluk1]

I have a 407C green dot on my 4" compact . Using the 2moa dot only is need for his ole man since I wear trifocals so stock group size from a rest with several different factory or home load loads and different weights averaged 4" . More than likely that will be about an average for most handguns in the same general range of a m&p performance center model included .

Now I do not carry a 9mm yet so my compact maybe a future CC . I do carry an 11 year old m&p 4.25 40sw and have a 2.p 5" PC version full size that shot 2.5" up to 3" groups with 155gr to 180gr ammo by far ,

My wife bought a m&p core 9mm 10 years ago . It has updated early one with a apex trigger group and gun smith fit barrel when they first came out and fit at home . That pistol when new was a junk 4.5" shooter . The apex GS barrel in it allows this ole man to shoot 1.25" groups with still m again with a dot optic and home rolled 125gr loads and a little better in a grandsons hands testing 124gr underwood +P ammo .

I'll more than likely fit a semi drop in apex barrel to the 4" compact before I carry it but for now I have 8" steel plates at 15 yards , a 9x15 silhouette at 25 and a full size at 40 yards I practice on and that stock barreled 4" compact is good for well general defensive needs .

Watch the video below that covers a apex semi drop in barrel in a m&p 2.0 " compact .

I am an old handgun hunter so I do like to have an accurate handgun in general .

M&P Pistol with Apex Tactical Barrel - Accuracy Results.

[Ethang]

My compact groups better than I can, and I am a darn decent shot.

[alou]

Originally Posted by hardluk1

I have a 407C green dot on my 4" compact . Using the 2moa dot only is need for his ole man since I wear trifocals so stock group size from a rest with several different factory or home load loads and different weights averaged 4" . More than likely that will be about an average for most handguns in the same general range of a m&p performance center model included .


I am an old handgun hunter so I do like to have an accurate handgun in general .

M&P Pistol with Apex Tactical Barrel - Accuracy Results.

Thank you for your reply. I have had 1.0s and the accuracy was poor and inconsistent at best. I was glad to find out about the premature barrel unlocking issue as it confirmed that "it wasn't me". My 2.0 4.25" must be an anomaly. With a Delta Point 9 MOA triangle reticle, it shoots like a laser. My best group off hand group at 25 yards was 2" (I stopped while I was ahead ). With a stock barrel and Apex trigger, it was more accurate than an identical model with Apex trigger and Apex barrel, as well as an Ed Brown Fueled M&P. I'm hoping the 4" compact will have similar accuracy with the same setup.

[alou]

Originally Posted by Ethang

My compact groups better than I can, and I am a darn decent shot.

What size groups may I ask were you getting?

[jbtrucker]

Never measured group size I do fairly well 5-7 yards with my 2.0 Compact with NATO and Federal 124 gr. It is also just as accurate as the M&P 2.0 Long Slide I owned

[ultratec00]

Unlike M&P 45s, Shield 45s, or 10mm, I have yet to own a M&P 9mm that met my minimum accuracy criteria. Own both a 1.0 and 2.0 9mm compact. Could not get consistent groups with either that met my minimum criteria for a CCW. Even tried a storm lake and wilson barrel, no dice. The 2.0 seemed to like factory gold dots, but that was about it. Too finicky for my taste, which was not the case for my FNSs, Sig, or Kimbers. The Caniks I own, are flat out accurate and out-shoot all of them.

That said, everyone needs to decide for themself what is acceptable. Bottom line, if it's not accurate off sandbags it will only be worse off hand.

[Telecaster]

I had MP9s in 1.0, Pro, 2.0 Compact, Shield 1.0, and Shield 2.0 PC flavors, and none shot better than “Combat Accurate.”. Ok for defense, but frustrating at the range.

[LVSteve]

Remarkable reluctance to post actual numbers in this thread.

[hardluk1]

Originally Posted by ultratec00

Unlike M&P 45s, Shield 45s, or 10mm, I have yet to own a M&P 9mm that met my minimum accuracy criteria. Own both a 1.0 and 2.0 9mm compact. Could not get consistent groups with either that met my minimum criteria for a CCW. Even tried a storm lake and wilson barrel, no dice. The 2.0 seemed to like factory gold dots, but that was about it. Too finicky for my taste, which was not the case for my FNSs, Sig, or Kimbers. The Caniks I own, are flat out accurate and out-shoot all of them.

That said, everyone needs to decide for themself what is acceptable. Bottom line, if it's not accurate off sandbags it will only be worse off hand.

I would never spend money on a drop barrel like from storm lake or wilson or others . Thats why I bought an apex gun smith fit barrel that easy to fit at home. Theres other with semi fit that are also very good shoots just like there are other handguns that shoot well . I do not find the canik tp9 I had a chance to shoot to be all that ether so if your happy with your canik , well good for you .

[alou]

Originally Posted by ultratec00

Unlike M&P 45s, Shield 45s, or 10mm, I have yet to own a M&P 9mm that met my minimum accuracy criteria. Own both a 1.0 and 2.0 9mm compact. Could not get consistent groups with either that met my minimum criteria for a CCW. Even tried a storm lake and wilson barrel, no dice. The 2.0 seemed to like factory gold dots, but that was about it. Too finicky for my taste, which was not the case for my FNSs, Sig, or Kimbers. The Caniks I own, are flat out accurate and out-shoot all of them.

That said, everyone needs to decide for themself what is acceptable. Bottom line, if it's not accurate off sandbags it will only be worse off hand.

What may I ask is your minimum accuracy criteria and what groups were you getting with your 2.0?

[cmansguns]

I'm 79 years old and my accuracy "standards" depend on what and why I'm trying to accomplish. I used to carry 2" J-Frame for most all of my adult years. About 4 years ago, I got a M&P 2.0 Compact, tried it out and began practicing.

The attached pics of targets are my Browning Hi-Power, and my Model 39-2, full size, semi-autos. These were 10 yard targets shot in June of 2019.

This basic grouping is what I have been trying for at 10 yards offhand "rapid" fire (double taps) for several years now, and I am NOT there yet. I don't think it is the gun, rather me aging out or possibly my grip being totally different. The sights are fine for me, actually better than the BHP, or the J Frames, but something is off. On most days I've got all shots somewhere in the 9 ring but it takes the whole 9 ring to cover the "group" and that is 8" on the dirty bird splatter I'm using.

This is not any kind of target accuracy and until I can get them all in the 10 ring I'm not even trying for Holster qualified.

Again I'm probably not answering your question but my "group" sizes are OK with me for close in self-defense, center mass with the 2.0 Compact, making it a good choice for me for EDC, but I'm striving for improvement at every practice session.

PS: NO pics of 2.0 targets....they just are not presentable on a shooting forum

[alou]

Originally Posted by cmansguns

I'm 79 years old and my accuracy "standards" depend on what and why I'm trying to accomplish. I used to carry 2" J-Frame for most all of my adult years. About 4 years ago, I got a M&P 2.0 Compact, tried it out and began practicing.

The attached pics of targets are my Browning Hi-Power, and my Model 39-2, full size, semi-autos. These were 10 yard targets shot in June of 2019.

This basic grouping is what I have been trying for at 10 yards offhand "rapid" fire (double taps) for several years now, and I am NOT there yet. I don't think it is the gun, rather me aging out or possibly my grip being totally different. The sights are fine for me, actually better than the BHP, or the J Frames, but something is off. On most days I've got all shots somewhere in the 9 ring but it takes the whole 9 ring to cover the "group" and that is 8" on the dirty bird splatter I'm using.

This is not any kind of target accuracy and until I can get them all in the 10 ring I'm not even trying for Holster qualified.

Again I'm probably not answering your question but my "group" sizes are OK with me for close in self-defense, center mass with the 2.0 Compact, making it a good choice for me for EDC, but I'm striving for improvement at every practice session.

PS: NO pics of 2.0 targets....they just are not presentable on a shooting forum

Those groups are outstanding for double taps or even controlled pairs! Great job!

[Well Armed]

IMHO, these are self-defense pistols. I don't understand the need to have all the rounds go through one hole??? I guarantee you that it won't matter in a life or death self-defense situation. I guarantee that what you're able to do at a slower pace while at the safety of a gun range with hearing protection on shooting at a peice of static paper that's not moving, rushing towards you, and/or shooting back will not matter much. You're not going to "group" well in a real-world scenario with a moving target....

Next, unless someone has strapped thier M&P to a Ransom Rest, I take opinions and results with regards to accuracy of the platform with a grain of salt and not top seriously. Even then, I personally don't give a darn about how well a plastic fantastic strike-fired pistol can group at 25 yeards. If I'm worried about that, there are other tools that are designed for and much better suited for that task.

[Well Armed]

FWIW.....

Originally Posted by stavey

I recently put the full size m&p 2.0 45 in my ransom rest. I tested both Zero 185 jhp as well as Hornady 185 xtp. Those are the only 2 bullets I load and for good reason. The Ransom doesn't lie if it's done correctly .
I used
Winchester xx? fired range brass -properly wet tumbled of course
Cci large pistol primers
Brass was undersized using an egw undersize 45acp die
No crimp , seated bullets to 1.230.
TESTED AT 25 YRDS
Now it's important to note the brass was not trimmed or sorted by length
I used titegroup Accurate 2 and wst powder
AND LOADED IT ALL ON A DILLON 650 PROGRESSIVE PRESS !!!
To test each load I load 6 rounds in a mag and shoot a group accounting for the first "flyer" which is due to my hand cycling the first round , I then measure the 5 remaining. Of the 15 loads I tested none were over 1.57"
With the best load averaging .617" that's 5 rounds 4 times.
The only 45 I have ever tested that did this well is my p227.
THIS M&P 2.0 IS ACCURATE = FUN TO SHOOT

M&P (2.0) 45 acp Ransom Rest

Here's the results one member got with their M&P 45 at 25 yards testing accuracy the correct way. Any other way sights, trigger, and the human factor comes into play. The type of ammo being used will also play a big role.

I've had worse groups because of the sights that were installed on the gun. If someone shot my Beretta APX, for only one example, next to a Glock with Trijicon HD XR or different sights installed that are better suited for target shooting, they'd group a lot better. The same would be true in reverse. Like I Said, unless a gun is strapped to a Ransom Rest, what others claim they're getting for accuracy goes through one ear and out the other whether they're shooting off a bag or not. It's not real proof of what the gun is capable of but rather what they are capable of.

[ultratec00]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and absolutely respect their right to have one. I don't know when, if ever, I saw anyone at the local ranges using a Ransom rest, but they absolutely reduce some level of variability assuming someone can afford one and the respective grip inserts for their particular firearm/firearms. We all work with what is available and understand some may be more skilled than others in that regard. It's whatever one feels comfortable doing and would encourage everyone to verify for themselves.

My only comment is the world has changed drastically over the past years and what once was unheard of may not be so much nowadays. If one is happy with whatever they can do at whatever distance they deem suitable, the only person it matters to is them and hopefully people respect that.

I'm a firm believer one can avoid a large majority of situations by simply using the grey matter between their ears. The old adage nothing good happens after midnight rings more truth than most want to admit. It's those situations that are random and unfortunate that can't be accounted and/or planned for.

Originally Posted by Well Armed

FWIW.....




M&P (2.0) 45 acp Ransom Rest

Here's the results one member got with their M&P 45 at 25 yards testing accuracy the correct way. Any other way sights, trigger, and the human factor comes into play. The type of ammo being used will also play a big role. All in all I still don't get it and think it's a silly obsession.

I've had worse groups because of the sights that were installed on the gun. If someone shot my Beretta APX, for only one example, next to a Glock with Trijicon HD XR or different sights installed that are better suited for target shooting, they'd group a lot better. The same would be true in reverse. Like I Said, unless a gun is strapped to a Ransom Rest, what others claim they're getting for accuracy goes through one ear and out the other whether they're shooting off a bag or not. It's not real proof of what the gun is capable of but rather what they are capable of.

[oworthsr]

Ultratec00 - for this old man, nothing good happens after the sun goes down. That's why my normal day is 3:30 am to 8 pm.

[Well Armed]

I'd like to add a few points to @ultratec00 great post...

Yes, most situations can be avoided with common sense and situational awareness. It is extremely rare that any of us civilians will ever have to use our firearms for self-defense. Heck, even most L.E. go their entire careers without having to fire a shot at anyone. Then compounded onto that as a civilian, the odds of being in a self-defense situation where we can legally justify shooting at someone 25 yards or more away is a even more less likely (but is still probable).

But hey, let's say you hit the billion dollar Powerball lottery and have to take a 40 yard shot at a mass shooter (a feat that only only one civilian out of 330+ million has had to accomplish in my lifetime). The loose tolerance stock Glocks are pretty much on a simular level as the M&P 2.0. Elisjsha Dicken was able to get 8 out of 10 hits on target at 40 yards to take out an attacker who was heavily armed. Guess what? He did so without getting all his shots in the same spot nor would that have been a beautiful grouping. Having tight groups did not matter.

Lastly, there are a plethora of reports by members on firearm forums across the internet, social media, and videos on YouTube of M&P owners successfully completing the "Dicken's Drill," aka they were able to get at least 8 out of 10 rounds on target within 15 seconds or less at 40 yards. They've done it with various M&P 2.0 calibers and sizes as well as with the M&P Shield. Not sure how much more one would expect out of a mass produced duty grade run of the mill strike-fired pistol.

10 out of 10 with a M&P 2.0 9mm


9 hits out of 10 with a heavier recoiling M&P 2.0 10mm

[rcamp]

I have a pair of the 2.0 compacts in 9mm and have been very pleased with them. In accuracy and function both.

[jschmidt]

There's "can it shoot" and "can you shoot". The only way to tell how accurate a gun is is to eliminate the person.

I would say everyone with good eyes ought to be able to shoot a 2" group at ten yards, slowfire.

[Gman556]

Originally Posted by Well Armed

I'd like to add a few points to @ultratec00 great post...

Yes, most situations can be avoided with common sense and situational awareness. It is extremely rare that any of us civilians will ever have to use our firearms for self-defense. Heck, even most L.E. go their entire careers without having to fire a shot at anyone. Then compounded onto that as a civilian, the odds of being in a self-defense situation where we can legally justify shooting at someone 25 yards or more away is a even more less likely (but is still probable).

But hey, let's say you hit the billion dollar Powerball lottery and have to take a 40 yard shot at a mass shooter (a feat that only only one civilian out of 330+ million has had to accomplish in my lifetime). The loose tolerance stock Glocks are pretty much on a simular level as the M&P 2.0. Elisjsha Dicken was able to get 8 out of 10 hits on target at 40 yards to take out an attacker who was heavily armed. Guess what? He did so without getting all his shots in the same spot nor would that have been a beautiful grouping. Having tight groups did not matter.

Lastly, there are a plethora of reports by members on firearm forums across the internet, social media, and videos on YouTube of M&P owners successfully completing the "Dicken's Drill," aka they were able to get at least 8 out of 10 rounds on target within 15 seconds or less at 40 yards. They've done it with various M&P 2.0 calibers and sizes as well as with the M&P Shield. Not sure how much more one would expect out of a mass produced duty grade run of the mill strike-fired pistol.


9 hits out of 10 with a heavier recoiling M&P 2.0 10mm

Agreed, and I'll also add the he did not take all shots from 40 yds according to him himself.

The positive thing that has come out of this misinformation is, it has sparked many hundreds of CCW'rs across the nation practicing all shots at 40 yards without any support or closing in.

I think it also woke a lot of people up from their narrow minded “everything only happens at 3 to 5 yards".

I'm not saying everyone who doesn't practice at these distances is incompetent or anything but there is the fact that if you're not confident to shoot from those distances due to only training at closer distances most of the time, then I definitely wouldn't blame you for not taking a shot further than the average 3 to 5 yards and so on.

Pushing yourself in training and successfully accomplishing your goals will definitely help in building confidence.

Dicken had come to the food court with his girlfriend for dinner, and was seated next to a column and trash can. The instant the shots rang out, Dicken pushed his girlfriend to the ground, drew his Glock 19, braced himself on the trash can and opened fire at a distance of 42 yards. At this distance, Dicken fired four times, hitting the murderer twice, with Dicken pausing only when panicked shoppers ran through his line of sight.

The injured murderer, rifle still in hand, retreated towards the bathroom. Dicken closed to within 20 yards and shot the murderer with another four shots. The murderer started to go down, but was still struggling to make it to the bathroom. Concerned for potential further carnage, Dicken closed in to about 25 feet and fired twice more. The murderer slumped over and didn’t move.

[stansdds]

Originally Posted by Well Armed

IMHO, these are self-defense pistols. I don't understand the need to have all the rounds go through one hole??? I guarantee you that it won't matter in a life or death self-defense situation. I guarantee that what you're able to do at a slower pace while at the safety of a gun range with hearing protection on shooting at a peice of static paper that's not moving, rushing towards you, and/or shooting back will not matter much. You're not going to "group" well in a real-world scenario with a moving target....

Next, unless someone has strapped thier M&P to a Ransom Rest, I take opinions and results with regards to accuracy of the platform with a grain of salt and not top seriously. Even then, I personally don't give a darn about how well a plastic fantastic strike-fired pistol can group at 25 yeards. If I'm worried about that, there are other tools that are designed for and much better suited for that task.

Exactly! I think poor accuracy from self-defense revolvers and pistols are usually not the fault of the handgun, but the user's inability to realize the accuracy potential due to short sight radius, light weight of the handgun, small grip surface, and a trigger that is not match grade.

With my defensive handguns, I'm very satisfied if I can keep my shots on a 9 inch diameter paper plate at 25 yards. Yes, you read it correctly, 9 inch groups at 25 yards. That's what I am capable of doing with a two-hand hold from a standing position with my S&W 640-1 and my 6946, my CCW handguns. I know it's me and not the firearms that is the problem.

[glenwolde]

Originally Posted by jschmidt

There's "can it shoot" and "can you shoot". The only way to tell how accurate a gun is is to eliminate the person.

I would say everyone with good eyes ought to be able to shoot a 2" group at ten yards, slowfire.

I don't disagree. But then the question of frequency comes in. If you can shoot 2" at ten yards *all the time" then you are really good.

For reference the NRA says you're good enough to be a Certified Pistol Instructor if you can do 6" at 15 yards, and even they allow for a few misses. Extrapolate that to ten yards and it's 4 inches. Some guy somewhere wrote that he defined "proficient" as keeping all your shots on 10" at ten yards. Not a "group", all rounds. I'm not sure what he meant by that really.

The definition of "group" seems to vary. Everybody seems to like to throw out their flyers. I've seen targets posted many times listing "group" sizes that only seemed to count the bulk of the rounds and ignored an undefined number of flyers. To me, if you put 99 rounds into 2 inches and one flyer opens it up to 4" you've got a 4" group.

But those happen to all of us at least occasionally. So I think it's best to give yourself a little slack and pick a number. 90%? 95%?

[LVSteve]

In this age of modern engineering design, CNC machining, andother modern manufacturing we are getting to the point of diminishing returns when it comes to the mechanical accuracy of affordable, modern handguns. I know that Walther went to a stepped chamber with the PDP series in to improve accuracy and the American Rifleman test showed they were largely successful.

The strange thing is that there is resistance in some circles to the improved accuracy of affordable guns. A quick trawl around the Web will turn up multiple comments like "A $300 9mm shouldn't shoot this well. It's not right." rather than the reviewer delighting that he got such a fine shooting piece at such a reasonable price. The Turkish Caniks and Stoegers seem to generate the most vitriol, especially the Canik with its very usable trigger. Here's a review of a cheap gun doing good.

Review: Stoeger STR-9 | An Official Journal Of The NRA

[alou]

Originally Posted by Well Armed

IMHO, these are self-defense pistols. I don't understand the need to have all the rounds go through one hole??? I guarantee you that it won't matter in a life or death self-defense situation. I guarantee that what you're able to do at a slower pace while at the safety of a gun range with hearing protection on shooting at a peice of static paper that's not moving, rushing towards you, and/or shooting back will not matter much. You're not going to "group" well in a real-world scenario with a moving target....

Next, unless someone has strapped thier M&P to a Ransom Rest, I take opinions and results with regards to accuracy of the platform with a grain of salt and not top seriously. Even then, I personally don't give a darn about how well a plastic fantastic strike-fired pistol can group at 25 yeards. If I'm worried about that, there are other tools that are designed for and much better suited for that task.

Are you saying mechanical accuracy of a EDC pistol doesn't matter? I beg to differ. You are correct that realistically, one will never be as accurate in an actual deadly force encounter as you will be at a stress-free range. But you are incorrect in saying enhanced mechanical accuracy doesn't matter. That's like saying for the same size and weight, police officers don't need rifle rated body armor because they are much more likely to be shot with pistol rounds. But if the only difference is one body armor offers more protection without any physical cost (weight, comfort, etc), why not use it? Some of us prepare for more than the worst case scenario of having to defend ourselves at a distance of 7 yards. I train to take headshots at 50 yards and beyond. Is that a likely scenario? Nope. Has it been necessary? Yup. Does it mean I will necessarily take that shot if it presented itself? Nope. If I'm capable of regularly making that shot, will that also mean I can make the hits at closer distances with surgical precision? Yup. Will surgical precision ever be a bad thing? Nope. Will surgical precision devolve into just pretty good accuracy under stress? Yup. So is the capability of the user and platform to make surgical precise shots a good thing?
Yup. And yes, at longer distances there are much better tools than a pistol. But do you normally carry an AR into the mall? No? Then I guess you will have to make do with what you do have on you and IMHO should probably know your and your weapon's limitations. Just my 2 cents.

[lunger]

Originally Posted by jschmidt

There's "can it shoot" and "can you shoot". The only way to tell how accurate a gun is is to eliminate the person.

I would say everyone with good eyes ought to be able to shoot a 2" group at ten yards, slowfire.

Everyone on the web can definitely do this.

Spending a lot of time on public ranges I can say very few people can come close to 2" at 10 yards. 2 feet probably closer

[Gman556]

Originally Posted by alou

Are you saying mechanical accuracy of a EDC pistol doesn't matter? I beg to differ. You are correct that realistically, one will never be as accurate in an actual deadly force encounter as you will be at a stress-free range. But you are incorrect in saying enhanced mechanical accuracy doesn't matter. That's like saying for the same size and weight, police officers don't need rifle rated body armor because they are much more likely to be shot with pistol rounds. But if the only difference is one body armor offers more protection without any physical cost (weight, comfort, etc), why not use it? Some of us prepare for more than the worst case scenario of having to defend ourselves at a distance of 7 yards. I train to take headshots at 50 yards and beyond. Is that a likely scenario? Nope. Has it been necessary? Yup. Does it mean I will necessarily take that shot if it presented itself? Nope. If I'm capable of regularly making that shot, will that also mean I can make the hits at closer distances with surgical precision? Yup. Will surgical precision ever be a bad thing? Nope. Will surgical precision devolve into just pretty good accuracy under stress? Yup. So is the capability of the user and platform to make surgical precise shots a good thing?
Yup. And yes, at longer distances there are much better tools than a pistol. But do you normally carry an AR into the mall? No? Then I guess you will have to make do with what you do have on you and IMHO should probably know your and your weapon's limitations. Just my 2 cents.

Agreed.

My two most accurate pistols are used for carry and competition.

I will not except medium accuracy for a defense or competition gun.

Remember there will be a lawyer and a prosecutor behind every bullet the comes out of your gun, so I want the most accuracy I can get.

[Well Armed]

Originally Posted by alou

Are you saying mechanical accuracy of a EDC pistol doesn't matter? I beg to differ.

Can you please quot the part were I stated or implied that? Respectful, I clearly type and said one thing, and you read and comprehended something completely different.

What I stated was that having tight groups in a self-defense situation doesn't matter. All the shots need not be on top of each other.

Originally Posted by alou

You are correct that realistically, one will never be as accurate in an actual deadly force encounter as you will be at a stress-free range. But you are incorrect in saying enhanced mechanical accuracy doesn't matter.

Accuracy matters, but you get to a point of diminishing returns to where you're over obsessing about something that's not going to produce much of a different outcome. If you can get 10 shots into the chess, neck, and head area of a moving attacker with even a 4" group, that will stop him just the same or maybe even faster than if all the shots were in one small area on top of each other.

Originally Posted by alou

Some of us prepare for more than the worst case scenario of having to defend ourselves at a distance of 7 yards. I train to take headshots at 50 yards and beyond. Is that a likely scenario? Nope. Has it been necessary? Yup. Does it mean I will necessarily take that shot if it presented itself? Nope. If I'm capable of regularly making that shot, will that also mean I can make the hits at closer distances with surgical precision? Yup. Will surgical precision ever be a bad thing? Nope. Will surgical precision devolve into just pretty good accuracy under stress? Yup. So is the capability of the user and platform to make surgical precise shots a good thing?

Yup. And yes, at longer distances there are much better tools than a pistol. But do you normally carry an AR into the mall? No? Then I guess you will have to make do with what you do have on you and IMHO should probably know your and your weapon's limitations. Just my 2 cents.

My opinion is that if you think you will ever need to take a 50+ yard head shot for self-defense, you're outright lying to yourself. I would say it would be a completely foolish and irresponsible shot to take with a pistol in public, especially when you're not shooting at a static paper target, you risk that round hitting someone else, and you'd mostly would face legal troubles after the fact.

I have no issues with training for unrealistic situations. I have no problems with training to make 50-yard head shots if you want to. Heck, you can train to make 100 - 150 yard head shots with your duty pistol if you've convinced yourself that you might need to in a realistic self-defense scenario or just to sharpen your stills. What I disagree with is expecting a $400-$550 dollar mass produced duty grade gun to do something it's not designed to do which would be to group well at these distances especially in stock configuration. These are purposely built with looser tolerance for reliability purposely and so that parts and be interchangeable and dropped in without fitting being necessary. Tighter tolerances typically equates to better accuracy at the cost of a loss of reliability. Even still, these modern pistols are still much more accurate than a shooter can be.

Other than that, I disagree with the premise that it's necessary to practice making hits with a handgun at 50+ yards in order to become very proficient at 7, 15, 20, or 25 yards. I agree that someone who can make 50 yard shots can also do well at closer distances, but I don't know about "surgical precise" (I doubt that you or anyone else are making those kind of shots with duty pistols especially when that type of accuracy is rear even with the usage of a Ransom Rest). That in itself does not mean that others who train at 7-25 yards can not equally get the same groups that you can. The core fundamentals are the same, e.g., properly lining up the sights, proper trigger control, keeping the sights aligned as the trigger breaks with as little movement as possible. It then simply becomes a matter of knowing where to hold to account for bullet drop at longer distances. All one needs to master are the core fundamentals whether they're shooting 7 yards or 50, and shooting out to 50+ yards is NOT needed to learn and master the fundamentals.

[Well Armed]

Originally Posted by lunger

Everyone on the web can definitely do this.

Spending a lot of time on public ranges I can say very few people can come close to 2" at 10 yards. 2 feet probably closer

I agree. I see most at the range who can't do that at 7 yards. Their paper target looks like it was hit with bird shot.

[STORMINORMAN]

At 50 yards your "target" better be shooting at you (or, conceivably someone else?) before those "head shots" should even be considered...

Otherwise one is really asking for a heap of explaining to do in order to avoid "adverse scrutiny"...

Cheers!

[alou]

Originally Posted by STORMINORMAN

At 50 yards your "target" better be shooting at you (or, conceivably someone else?) before those "head shots" should even be considered...

Otherwise one is really asking for a heap of explaining to do in order to avoid "adverse scrutiny"...

Cheers!

Absolutely. For most civilians and even some law enforcement, engaging at that distance is not advisable. But there is a big difference between what one is capable of doing and what one should do. In martial arts there are techniques that are intended to maim or kill one’s opponent. But that does not mean just because of you are proficient in those techniques you should use them when the opportunity arises.

[Ethang]

Originally Posted by alou

What size groups may I ask were you getting?

I don't shoot "groups", but have no trouble holding in the 5 ring of a TCQ-95 at 15 yards or the 10 ring on a B-8 at 10 yards.

[DaSvenska]

Originally Posted by Ethang

I don't shoot "groups", but have no trouble holding in the 5 ring of a TCQ-95 at 15 yards or the 10 ring on a B-8 at 10 yards.

Those are good "Holds" right there. Nice shooting!

[Ethang]

Originally Posted by DaSvenska

Those are good "Holds" right there. Nice shooting!

to be completely honest... I can't do that ALL DAY LONG... but I can do it for a solid 20 minutes or so in the morning and sometimes late in the afternoon after a power nap...

[LVSteve]

Originally Posted by Ethang

to be completely honest... I can't do that ALL DAY LONG... but I can do it for a solid 20 minutes or so in the morning and sometimes late in the afternoon after a power nap...

How many gunfights do you get into each day?

[stansdds]

Originally Posted by Ethang

to be completely honest... I can't do that ALL DAY LONG... but I can do it for a solid 20 minutes or so in the morning and sometimes late in the afternoon after a power nap...

And how long are the gunfights in which you are engaged? A box of 50 is plenty for me with any of my EDC handguns. Actually, it's more than plenty and I tend to take my time going through those 50 rounds.

[DaSvenska]

I still like the "Triple 10 Drill" (My words) B-8 Target, from Low ready or holster- 10 Yards, 10 shots in 10 seconds and all in the Black. This keeps me a good shot and keeps me from beating myself up over group sizes.

[paknheat]

I think sometimes you gotta find what your pistol likes best. My .40 really likes the Speer GDHP in 165 grain. That’s 5 shots at 15 yards from the holster.

Any other load I tried fell into the 3” groups, give or take. I was pleased greatly when I fired those last shots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[stansdds]

Originally Posted by paknheat

I think sometimes you gotta find what your pistol likes best. My .40 really likes the Speer GDHP in 165 grain. That’s 5 shots at 15 yards from the holster.

Any other load I tried fell into the 3” groups, give or take. I was pleased greatly when I fired those last shots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Nice grouping. In looking at your target, I'm resisting the urge to make some remarks as this is a family friendly forum.