|
|
|
05-26-2018, 02:06 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Kansas
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
3.6" why?
I mean this sincerely, I'm not being facetious. Could someone explain why they would want the compact with the 3.6" bbl and the same size grip? For me, it is the exact opposite of what I'd want. I find grips the difficult part to conceal and I like a longer sight radius. If anything, I'd want a G17 size upper half on a G19 size frame. What attracted those of you who chose this new one to move in the other direction?
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
05-26-2018, 06:24 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SC
Posts: 113
Likes: 8
Liked 45 Times in 21 Posts
|
|
The "Commander" style pistol concept originated by Colt appeals to a lot of people. To me, a full size frame and shorter slide balances better and there isn't as much weight hanging out front but rather the weight sits on top of your hands vs in front of them. I'm not sure I'm explaining that clearly. The Glock 19X balances better than a regular 19 for me, and I prefer my Colt Commander Rail Gun to my Government Rail Gun for the same reasons.
ETA - I just picked up an IOP M&P 2.0 Compact 4" on Wednesday along with a blue label Glock 19.5. I really like them both though I haven't had an opportunity to shoot either yet. When I can put eyes on a 3.6" M&P I might not be able to resist the urge to bring it home.
Last edited by 45FMJoe; 05-26-2018 at 06:30 AM.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
05-26-2018, 07:53 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Manassas Va
Posts: 437
Likes: 1
Liked 182 Times in 127 Posts
|
|
Lighter weight.
|
05-26-2018, 08:00 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 350
Likes: 5
Liked 256 Times in 126 Posts
|
|
I've never liked the "Commander" proportions. I agree that a long slide and short grip are much more appealing.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
05-26-2018, 08:00 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 8,777
Likes: 19,550
Liked 11,881 Times in 5,393 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Wolf
I mean this sincerely, I'm not being facetious. Could someone explain why they would want the compact with the 3.6" bbl and the same size grip? For me, it is the exact opposite of what I'd want. I find grips the difficult part to conceal and I like a longer sight radius. If anything, I'd want a G17 size upper half on a G19 size frame. What attracted those of you who chose this new one to move in the other direction?
|
I dunno, but someone at S&W thought it was a great idea. For carry around the waistline or in a vertical shoulder holster, I agree, it is generally the grip portion of the receiver that is hardest to conceal. In a horizontal shoulder holster, the longer the barrel and slide, the harder it is to conceal.
One reason I have not traded my 6946 for an M&P (or even a Glock) is that it has a 3.5 inch barrel, which is a good compromise between concealment, a useful sight radius, and a barrel long enough to generate good velocity and the grip is short enough (especially with a modified 5906 magazine floor plate) to conceal. The only thing more concealable for me would be a 3913.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
05-26-2018, 08:09 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 5,057
Likes: 524
Liked 1,909 Times in 788 Posts
|
|
The shorter slide carries more comfortable IWB. The longer grip shoots better than a short grip for most.
__________________
Centennial Every Day
|
The Following 9 Users Like Post:
|
|
05-26-2018, 08:10 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SC
Posts: 113
Likes: 8
Liked 45 Times in 21 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN2944
I've never liked the "Commander" proportions. I agree that a long slide and short grip are much more appealing.
|
It depends on what you're using it for. For LE use, the Commander model makes a lot of sense. Longer slides are a pain in the *** because the barrel tries to dig into the seat of your patrol car and that in turn tries to push your gun belt up. It's very, very uncomfortable. Having a larger frame with larger capacity magazines and a shorter slide is a Godsend.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
05-26-2018, 08:20 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 542
Likes: 4
Liked 340 Times in 181 Posts
|
|
I carry the shield with either the 8 round mag, or have modified the 7 roind mags with a pinky grip extender. Which results in exact same height as the 2.0 compact height (see my other thread what would you do and why).
So for me, going to the 2.0 9c would result in an additional half in lomger barrel over the shield, plus the additional sight radius, plus an almost doubling of capacity. Adding another half and inch barrel would only add weight and a. It more sight radius. The weight gain from a shield to the compact is already a big jump. I would not want the additional weight for what I do not perceive much, or any benefit. In fact I view it as a detriment.
|
05-26-2018, 09:13 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Kansas
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Weight distribution, ahhhhh, that makes sense. Thanks.
The Commander did have a nice feel to it.
Still surprised that is what S&W decided to do next but I guess they do have to sell guns to people other than me.
|
05-26-2018, 04:03 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: MI
Posts: 207
Likes: 100
Liked 52 Times in 37 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Photoman44
The shorter slide carries more comfortable IWB. The longer grip shoots better than a short grip for most.
|
Right, especially if you carry appendix. I carry that way and the wing claw on my Kydex holster keeps the grip in tight to my body so I like a full grip on a handgun. Bending over with a long barrel is the problem AIWB. For me anyway.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
05-26-2018, 04:35 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 2,241
Likes: 735
Liked 1,039 Times in 671 Posts
|
|
Why not?
10char
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
05-26-2018, 04:49 PM
|
|
US Veteran Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,143
Likes: 3,701
Liked 5,261 Times in 1,885 Posts
|
|
I just bought the 4.0" 2.0 9mm Compact, and actually I'm glad I did. I thought at first I'd rather have the 3.6" model, but since I couldn't find one, I bought the 4.0, which turns out is an excellent fit and very comfortable (balance and grip) in my hand. 0.4" isn't much difference, and I definitely want the 15 round capacity (which both have, though.)
I like Commander length 1911s (4.25" barrel with full size grip) because they balance better for me. The 0.75" difference between the Commander and full size isn't that much, but it feels better to me. Same thing with the compact versus the 4.25" and 4.5" M&Ps. A lot of it is personal preference, and kudos to S&W for trying to accommodate everyone's preferences.
|
05-26-2018, 04:51 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,928
Likes: 2,548
Liked 3,840 Times in 1,134 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saudade
Why not?
|
This. Different strokes for different folks.
__________________
America First
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
05-26-2018, 05:17 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 109
Likes: 124
Liked 136 Times in 56 Posts
|
|
Method of carry determines whether the grip length or slide length is the bigger factor in concealability. Ho-hum cartridge in full length slide is not my personal preference. 3.6" bbl and modern, pressure-optimized cartridges in double stack are what I feel happy about.
|
05-26-2018, 08:59 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 96
Likes: 130
Liked 65 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
I'm in the "short barrel/full frame" crowd. Weight distribution, quicker rotation from the holster, better fit in a vehicle - where that last attribute matters since a full arm draw is not possible.
The Shield is my carry gun, and when they come out with a double stack version, I'm all in.
My 2.0C is for the house.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
05-26-2018, 09:08 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Indiana
Posts: 389
Likes: 353
Liked 207 Times in 143 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stansdds
I dunno, but someone at S&W thought it was a great idea. For carry around the waistline or in a vertical shoulder holster, I agree, it is generally the grip portion of the receiver that is hardest to conceal. In a horizontal shoulder holster, the longer the barrel and slide, the harder it is to conceal.
One reason I have not traded my 6946 for an M&P (or even a Glock) is that it has a 3.5 inch barrel, which is a good compromise between concealment, a useful sight radius, and a barrel long enough to generate good velocity and the grip is short enough (especially with a modified 5906 magazine floor plate) to conceal. The only thing more concealable for me would be a 3913.
|
Yeah, I would agree.
__________________
USMC 83'-87', NRA Member.
|
05-27-2018, 01:16 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 14,710
Likes: 2,926
Liked 17,102 Times in 6,271 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Wolf
I find grips the difficult part to conceal and I like a longer sight radius.
|
I couldn't agree more.
However, the public doesn't agree with us. Most people look for a short barrel when thinking of concealment. I don't know why, but it's a fact.
The other reason could be to appease the AIWB crowd. When you carry a gun that way, you must have a short barrel or you won't be able to move.
__________________
Freedom isn't free.
|
05-27-2018, 05:50 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 129
Likes: 75
Liked 100 Times in 44 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Wolf
I mean this sincerely, I'm not being facetious. Could someone explain why they would want the compact with the 3.6" bbl and the same size grip? For me, it is the exact opposite of what I'd want. I find grips the difficult part to conceal and I like a longer sight radius. If anything, I'd want a G17 size upper half on a G19 size frame. What attracted those of you who chose this new one to move in the other direction?
|
Options. I have both. The 3.6 is quicker to draw and overall feels quicker to get the sight in target. It’s a great feeling overall fun.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
05-27-2018, 06:52 PM
|
|
US Veteran Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,143
Likes: 3,701
Liked 5,261 Times in 1,885 Posts
|
|
Why are there different flavors of ice cream? Different models of cars? and so on...
It's trying to give consumers their preferences, insofar as it's practical and cost effective. If everyone wanted the same thing, then a manufacturer would only make that one thing.
|
05-27-2018, 07:57 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 177
Likes: 693
Liked 257 Times in 106 Posts
|
|
MP 45 Midsize with IWB holster. The perfect weapon for my big hands.
|
05-27-2018, 08:21 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Sonoran Desert, USA
Posts: 577
Likes: 967
Liked 1,503 Times in 403 Posts
|
|
We're living in the age of endless firearm/caliber choices, M'erica.
__________________
Ad Astra Per Aspera
Last edited by Scorpion520AZ; 05-27-2018 at 08:23 PM.
|
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 06:11 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 350
Likes: 5
Liked 256 Times in 126 Posts
|
|
I'm probably just frustrated that they released this variation but I STILL can't get a black 5" 2.0.
|
05-28-2018, 09:28 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 53
Likes: 4
Liked 41 Times in 22 Posts
|
|
It’s another option, and options are always good. Plus it’s also a beta test of sorts because if it runs well, I think we will be seeing a 2.0 subcompact (2.0 version of the 1.0 9c) using the 3.6” upper and a chopped down compact frame.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 11:37 AM
|
|
US Veteran Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,143
Likes: 3,701
Liked 5,261 Times in 1,885 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN2944
I'm probably just frustrated that they released this variation but I STILL can't get a black 5" 2.0.
|
Or a 4" 2.0 Compact .45...
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
05-28-2018, 11:44 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 14,710
Likes: 2,926
Liked 17,102 Times in 6,271 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN2944
I'm probably just frustrated that they released this variation but I STILL can't get a black 5" 2.0.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKC
Or a 4" 2.0 Compact .45...
|
This right here is why people build their own guns. It's the only way to ensure you get exactly what you want.
I'll bet if we wait long enough, S&W will eventually offer what you guys want. The 5" 2.0 is easily answered through Cerakote though.
__________________
Freedom isn't free.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
05-31-2018, 12:02 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: SW Missouri
Posts: 2,640
Likes: 338
Liked 3,290 Times in 1,361 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 45FMJoe
The "Commander" style pistol concept originated by Colt appeals to a lot of people. To me, a full size frame and shorter slide balances better and there isn't as much weight hanging out front but rather the weight sits on top of your hands vs in front of them. I'm not sure I'm explaining that clearly. The Glock 19X balances better than a regular 19 for me, and I prefer my Colt Commander Rail Gun to my Government Rail Gun for the same reasons.
ETA - I just picked up an IOP M&P 2.0 Compact 4" on Wednesday along with a blue label Glock 19.5. I really like them both though I haven't had an opportunity to shoot either yet. When I can put eyes on a 3.6" M&P I might not be able to resist the urge to bring it home.
|
But the weight out front steadies the muzzle and makes it easier to hit the target, does it not?
|
05-31-2018, 11:01 AM
|
|
US Veteran Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,143
Likes: 3,701
Liked 5,261 Times in 1,885 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rastoff
This right here is why people build their own guns. It's the only way to ensure you get exactly what you want.
|
Exactly what I want is something I seriously doubt S&W will ever make...and that's a 4" 2.0 Compact in .45 WITHOUT rails. I know, if I don't like them, I don't have to use them...but I don't like the looks of them, and I don't want to hang lights or other doo-dads on the front of my pistol. I'm sure I'm in the very small minority...I know I'm not the only one, though, because I saw a thread here recently where a member sawed off the rails and filled the frame in with (I forget what...JB weld?) and filed it smooth. I don't have the skills to do that, without butchering my pistol. I doubt S&W would ever make one since it probably wouldn't be a big seller. Oh, and the frame would be FDE with a black slide, grip inserts, and magazine base pads.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
05-31-2018, 05:48 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Upper East Tennessee
Posts: 71
Likes: 94
Liked 61 Times in 26 Posts
|
|
It seems that whenever Smith introduces a new model that isn't made in the same cookie cutter mold as many others, there are those who are incredulous. Just look at some people's reaction to the .389 Shield EZ. Why? they ask, as if unable to wrap their mind around the fact that it and this shorter slide 2.0 compact are just options that:
(1) Are exactly what some shooters want in a handgun.
(2) Smith believes there are enough numbers of those people that they can make money producing and selling it to those people.
Not everyone thinks in the same small square box. Thank goodness for those who think of other options. That's the reason we are truly living in the "golden age" of handguns with many, many options from Smith and other quality makers.
I welcome this new addition to the 2.0 family, even though it is unlikely that I will ever buy one.
Well done, Smith & Wesson. Well Done.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
05-31-2018, 09:21 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SC
Posts: 113
Likes: 8
Liked 45 Times in 21 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothshooter
But the weight out front steadies the muzzle and makes it easier to hit the target, does it not?
|
I do not believe so, no. The weight is further forward from your hands. Calisthenics are a pain! You can hold more weight closer to your body and less weight with your arms outstretched. So to me, the heavier muzzle does exactly the opposite. I can steady a shorter barrel more effectively.
|
06-01-2018, 05:20 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 350
Likes: 5
Liked 256 Times in 126 Posts
|
|
^^^^^
Weight forward can reduce muzzle rise from recoil and get you back on target more quickly. The longer sight radius enhances precise aiming.
Shorter slides/barrels make you think you are more steady because the short sight radius doesn't give as much visual feedback of the movement that is occurring.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-01-2018, 12:38 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 14,710
Likes: 2,926
Liked 17,102 Times in 6,271 Posts
|
|
Muzzle weight doesn't make it easier to hit the target, but it does help stabilize the gun. However, in a pistol the difference is really small.
If you want to see just how steady you really are, regardless of barrel length, put a laser on your gun. This will really open your eyes regarding stability.
__________________
Freedom isn't free.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-01-2018, 06:32 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 542
Likes: 4
Liked 340 Times in 181 Posts
|
|
^^^
Also is the reason I find lasers completely useless. All you do is try and “chase” the red (or green) dot all over. It is more distracting than helpful. At least in my opinion!
Wife has a laser on her 642. I tried it and shot all over the place. Shut the dam laser off and dramatically improved my accuracy!
|
06-02-2018, 12:17 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Liked 679 Times in 313 Posts
|
|
This version is about perfect in my hand.
I like the capacity & grip, and I like barrel length for concealment.
For me, it ain't the grip that prints, it's the bottom end that sometimes exposes itself under an untucked shirt or a short jacket when I reach or bend over.
Shorter barrel is better concealment, for me.
Denis
|
06-02-2018, 09:13 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 8,777
Likes: 19,550
Liked 11,881 Times in 5,393 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyingfool
^^^
Also is the reason I find lasers completely useless. All you do is try and “chase” the red (or green) dot all over. It is more distracting than helpful. At least in my opinion!
Wife has a laser on her 642. I tried it and shot all over the place. Shut the dam laser off and dramatically improved my accuracy!
|
And that likely explains why I am more accurate with iron sights than with a red (or whatever color floats your boat) dot optical sight. My AR has an optical red dot sight, I rarely turn it on.
|
06-02-2018, 10:56 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 542
Likes: 4
Liked 340 Times in 181 Posts
|
|
^^^^
Hummm, I have been thinking about getting a red dot site for my sport 2.
Now you have given me serious reason to reconsider!
|
06-02-2018, 12:07 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Northwest Georgia
Posts: 832
Likes: 276
Liked 335 Times in 182 Posts
|
|
Scorpion,nice video,thanks for sharing that. I had been looking for a vid all over the place on the 3.6 with no success. I like what I saw in this one,so again many thanks.
__________________
Blessed be the Lord,my Rock
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-03-2018, 01:01 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 96
Likes: 130
Liked 65 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN2944
^^^^^
Weight forward can reduce muzzle rise from recoil and get you back on target more quickly. The longer sight radius enhances precise aiming.
Shorter slides/barrels make you think you are more steady because the short sight radius doesn't give as much visual feedback of the movement that is occurring.
|
Even though I posted that I am in the short barrel/full frame group, I agree with this because it is true. Combat handguns sold to the military and police are usually of the full size variety, not only because of the capacity, but for the reasons in this post.
My experience with years of shooting traditional muzzle loaders applies: A long, heavy barrel out there will actually stabilize the aim by dampening the heartbeat and involuntary muscle movements. Important when you only have one shot. The same is true for handguns. I've yet to see a compact precision target pistol on the formal circuit, or maybe I've missed it...
My preference for snubbies is based mostly on a perceived quicker rotation from the holster - especially in a car, or other close quarters situation where a fast developing threat is within 5 feet and aiming may be secondary to initial suppression fire. This stuff happens. It can happen while you're pumping gas, or in the checkout line, or stopped in your car, etc.
To that end, most of my practice is based upon that scenario with the balance just for plinking and grins. I have the Shield 9 and I have the 2.0C 4" with the latter for home defense and pure shooting enjoyment at the range.
So, to me, the 3.6" barrel is almost like splitting hairs between the two, but to someone who does not currently own either, the 3.6 would be a great choice.
|
06-03-2018, 01:05 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 96
Likes: 130
Liked 65 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rastoff
Muzzle weight doesn't make it easier to hit the target, but it does help stabilize the gun. However, in a pistol the difference is really small.
If you want to see just how steady you really are, regardless of barrel length, put a laser on your gun. This will really open your eyes regarding stability.
|
I tried a laser sighted SIG once. Very humbling - and it sure wasn't the SIG.
|
06-03-2018, 01:13 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 96
Likes: 130
Liked 65 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 45FMJoe
I do not believe so, no. The weight is further forward from your hands. Calisthenics are a pain! You can hold more weight closer to your body and less weight with your arms outstretched. So to me, the heavier muzzle does exactly the opposite. I can steady a shorter barrel more effectively.
|
I respectfully disagree, but as Rastoff has said, it matters less in pistols. Barrel weight dampens nervous twitches, heartbeats, and involuntary muscle movements that are occurring as you try to hold still.
Same principle applies to high wire walkers. They use that long weighted pole to dampen everything down.
I mentioned my long barreled muzzle loaders in another post here. The weight seems excessive until you draw a bead, then, everything slows down out there at the front sight. Try aiming a modern open sighted Ruger 77 and see the difference in hold.
|
06-03-2018, 02:38 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Texas
Posts: 3,998
Likes: 8,262
Liked 10,646 Times in 3,000 Posts
|
|
A better question is, "3.6" where?" I'm considering one, but in the DFW area, Academy and Cabelas don't sell them, GrabAGun only has them on backorder (with just an itty-bitty discount), and my range doesn't have one and doesn't know when it will get one. I'm one of those picky people that likes to at least hold a gun before I buy. Since these pistols don't seem to exist, the issue of "why?" is a moot point.
__________________
What, me worry?
Last edited by swsig; 06-03-2018 at 04:55 PM.
|
06-03-2018, 07:24 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Travel ....
Posts: 86
Likes: 56
Liked 43 Times in 28 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN2944
^^^^^
Weight forward can reduce muzzle rise from recoil and get you back on target more quickly. The longer sight radius enhances precise aiming.
Shorter slides/barrels make you think you are more steady because the short sight radius doesn't give as much visual feedback of the movement that is occurring.
|
At best all things being equal let's evaluate the advantage
Time ....would be measured in milliseconds
Accuracy difference with ...0.4 inches at handgun self defense ranges negligible
The HK P30SK is 3.2
The Shield 3.1
Other guns 3.9
Anything at or over 3.0 seems to be the sweet spot
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-03-2018, 08:24 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 20
Likes: 3
Liked 10 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
My dealer got ahold of one for me. The only one he has had so far. Not many out there. I like the balance of it.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-03-2018, 08:36 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: philly burbs
Posts: 117
Likes: 47
Liked 72 Times in 42 Posts
|
|
to compete with the g19?
|
06-03-2018, 11:24 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 542
Likes: 4
Liked 340 Times in 181 Posts
|
|
I have zero doubt longer barrels are more accurate. But the VAST majority of the self defense situations are within 20’ for sure. And mostly within 10’.
A self defense situation happens so fast, there is little time to take a bead and time to aim. It is reactive. Even in a home, how many people are really going to be shooting more than 20’? Especially in the dark?
So is the difference between 3.6” and 4” really any significance?
I don't know.
Last edited by Flyingfool; 06-03-2018 at 11:27 AM.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-03-2018, 04:00 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Liked 679 Times in 313 Posts
|
|
Besides being easier in concealing the shorter barrel, I've found that a shorter sight radius tends to be (assuming good visible sights, which the pistol has) quicker to pick up & align on target than a longer sight radius.
I use sights whenever there's room, so that does have importance to me.
This pistol is very simply just "IT" for me, my hand, and my belt.
Denis
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-03-2018, 10:45 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 19
Likes: 38
Liked 13 Times in 7 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyingfool
I have zero doubt longer barrels are more accurate.
|
Barrels with a longer sight radius can be shot more accurately. Nothing inherent in length makes the barrel itself more accurate.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-03-2018, 11:22 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Liked 679 Times in 313 Posts
|
|
As a matter of comparison & context, this 3.6 with 16-round capacity is maybe an eighth of an inch taller & maybe a quarter-inch or less shorter than the new 9-shot .380 EZ.
The slide is close enough to the same length as the Walther PPQ2 SC (sub compact) to not quibble over, with the Walther barrel at 3.5 inches.
The little Walther, with extended 15-round finger rest mag inserted, is maybe 3/8 of an inch taller.
This new 2.0 3.6 Compact gives us a very concealable size with a full-sized grip and great onboard capacity.
The popular Glock 26 in 9mm has a 3.42-inch barrel, which is quite concealable up front, but looses grip coverage & control, unless you add something to the bottom to hang onto, which many people do & which adds length for those who have a problem with printing grip sections in concealment.
The 3.6 2.0 Compact just simply offers an excellent all-round package for many of us.
It doesn't appeal to everybody, but there's no reason why ANY new model should.
Out of the many years of shooting Smith autos I've done, this one strikes me as the best for my current needs.
Those who disagree need not buy.
Denis
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-04-2018, 06:20 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SC
Posts: 113
Likes: 8
Liked 45 Times in 21 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flintlock1
Even though I posted that I am in the short barrel/full frame group, I agree with this because it is true. Combat handguns sold to the military and police are usually of the full size variety, not only because of the capacity, but for the reasons in this post.
|
What if I told you the largest law enforcement agency in the United States of America issues a compact pistol? HK really got a sweetheart contract for their P2000 which is far from a full size pistol!
|
06-04-2018, 06:27 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SC
Posts: 113
Likes: 8
Liked 45 Times in 21 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyingfool
I have zero doubt longer barrels are more accurate. But the VAST majority of the self defense situations are within 20’ for sure. And mostly within 10’.
A self defense situation happens so fast, there is little time to take a bead and time to aim. It is reactive. Even in a home, how many people are really going to be shooting more than 20’? Especially in the dark?
So is the difference between 3.6” and 4” really any significance?
I don't know.
|
Like Klatch said before, a longer barrel isn't intrinsically more accurate. A longer barrel should, with all things equal, create more velocity.
I agree with DPris, too. I bought my first Commander 1911 a few months ago and I really like the shortened sight radius. For me it's faster and easier to line up the sights in comparison to a Government model. But, that is just an opinion. Your opinion might be opposite of mine and that's ok... you can be wrong.
|
06-05-2018, 02:09 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Liked 679 Times in 313 Posts
|
|
Many who carried the Commander in the old days did so for the weight AND the dynamics.
It was considered to be a "quicker" pistol.
More dynamic in situational use.
Denis
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|