Pistol Petpeeves: Adapt or Abandon?

[Echo40]

I often see posts on the internet speaking of carry guns which they loved for a number of reasons, yet ultimately gave up on due to an issue that they had encountered with it. Sometimes it's that it didn't fit their hands quite right, other times it's because the recoil was too stout, sometimes it's because the trigger isn't to their liking, other times it's because it prints a bit high or low/left or right, sometimes it's because it's ammo-sensitive and doesn't cycle their favorite brand/type of ammunition, etc.

This is something that has always puzzled me because I'm just the sort of guy who typically attempts to find a solution to a problem before I give up on it, especially when it's something that requires a financial investment such as a firearm, and the number of reasons why I like it outnumber the reason(s) why I dislike it.
So if it doesn't fit my hands, then I'll sooner change the grips. If the recoil is too stout or the ammo doesn't cycle reliably, then I'll sooner experiment with different ammo. If it prints high or low, left or right, then I'll either adjust the sights or my aim.
I'm not putting down folks who would rather save time by simply replacing a handgun that doesn't work for them, I'm just expressing surprise towards those who would immediately trade in a gun which they were otherwise fond of over an issue which could have probably been worked around or even solved with a bit of effort.

In fact, one of the most major changes that I've ever made in order to adapt to a problem that I had to a carry gun was with the M&P40 Shield that I bought back in January as my new Summer Carry gun. I loved the gun, but I immediately discovered that the recoil spring was so heavy that I couldn't reliably/consistently pull the slide back far enough to chamber a round.
I always carry with a round in the chamber, so it wouldn't be an immediate issue in a self-defense situation, but should I ever need to reload then it could make the difference between life and death. This is were certain folks would either swap out the RSA for a lighter one, or just abandon the gun altogether and sell/trade it in for another, but I really liked the gun, so I did something rather extreme. I accepted it as a shortcoming of my own rather than the firearm, and decided that the most logical solution was to increase my own grip strength, so I went online, looked up some exercises to increase grip strength, and proceeded to integrate said exercises into my workout routine. Within a very short time, my grip strength became strong enough to work the slide with ease, the problem was solved, and now my hands are stronger too, so it was a win/win.

Anyway, I'm curious to see how other users here respond to a problem with a prospective carry gun. Are you more likely to adapt to or abandon a carry gun which you discover is less than ideal for you out of the box?
Also, I would be interested in hearing some stories from folks who have struggled with unforeseen issues with new carry guns and how they came to resolve the issue one way or the other, so please post any stories you might have on the subject below.

 

[Sevens]

I'll imagine someone will counter your post immediately with some version of "my life is too valuable to spend time and effort to make something work rather than replace it with something else."

For my comfort level, I pick something that has a reputation for reliability and then I adapt myself to it. To that end, I'm in the much smaller pool of daily gun carry guys who has been licensed to carry for 13 years and has had literally TWO different EDC's in that time.

First was a Glock 29, 10mm, because many many years previous I had been infatuated with the 10mm round and the G29 was the only viable 10mm carry gun sized option on the market. So I carried that for 6 or 7 years.

I knew that eventually I would morph to a 9mm and I did, a Walther PPQ M2, and I've been carrying that now for almost as long as I had carried the Glock.

They both work, they are reliable, I can shoot them effectively and they are both ugly working tools. I don't need them to be any better or more personalized than that.

To answer the question specifically -- if there was something WRONG with my carry gun and it began malfunctioning, I would replace it hastily. Only then would I consider trying to rectify the problem gun. If I were able to get the problem gun functioning well again, it would get HARD tested with a high round count in short order and then it would get sold or swapped.

 

[BAM-BAM]

First don't rush to buy the latest and greatest fantastic plastic...... give it a couple of years!

"New" means...... new ..... not necessarily better.
The "latest and greatest" means .... the latest"........"greatest" has to be proven!!!!!!!!!!!


All Glocks may look alike but there got to be a reason they are on Gen 5!

Beretta has made a lot of changes to the 92 over the past 45 years.... after offering the S,SB and F..... the FS was introduced in 1985 ..... followed by the G and Elite and X series. With 3 generations of locking blocks.......over the past 35 years.

We all love our 3rd Gen. S&W autos.

I'm still carrying my Gen 3 Smiths and Beretta 92 that have proven themselves....... then I buy a backup and a backup to the backup.

Don't get me started on revolvers which are all improved versions of the 1899

 

[waffles]

The poll seems to miss the point that buying another pistol is a solution to the problems described. New grips, new ammo (either trying new types or bumping up consumption to train to a new point of aim/technique), new triggers, etc., are all financial expenditures and often have no cost savings over selling the pistol that doesn't work well for an individual and purchasing one that does.

As an example, I had a gen 1 shield that was stiff, had a crummy trigger, was a bit large for the capacity, and I never shot very well with it. I could have spent a lot of time and money shooting it to get used to it, or I could do what I did at the time and sell it to buy a Glock 43, which performed excellently for me right out of the box. I used that Glock 43 until I found another pistol, a P365XL, that shot even better, held more ammunition, and could be concealed easily in any of the situations in which I'd conceal a Glock 43.

We live in a market thoroughly flooded with reliable pistols, if one doesn't agree with you, you can find one that does. If I was somewhere that limited purchases, or a cop that had a department mandated duty pistol, sure, put in the effort to get better with what you have, it can be done. If you're not, why bother?

 

[ISCS Yoda]

To that end, I'm in the much smaller pool of daily gun carry guys who has been licensed to carry for 13 years and has had literally TWO different EDC's in that time.

Part of that is true for me. I guess I'm at the 24 year mark. Prior to that, however, I basically stuck to a Beretta 950 BS (.25 ACP) and a 2" Model 10.

After the CHL, now LTC, I was a different 2 gun carrier, a CS-45 and J frame carrier.

But times changed for me, needs changed, and so I changed guns somewhat frequently. . And, like Sevens above, I morphed to a 9mm as well. S&W M6906, S&W CS-9, Walther CCP.

As for J frames I dumped Airweights for a M649. I don't like the recoil of Airweights and the 649 is just as easy to carry and far easier to shoot.

I am very much in the "resolved the issue with a different gun" camp instead of working with what I had.

But I still carry 2" K frames now and again..........3rd Gens and K frames are my carry favorites - I hope my Walther CCP and M649 don't take offense....

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Interesting question. I think your question presumes that adapt-vs-abandon is some sort of personal quality or personality choice that governs most decisions, at least on guns. In my case, I believe that the governing factor is the actual set of facts in each individual case, or at least my estimate of those facts. I have done both. In hindsight, I am not sure that I was always right.

I do not know whether your presumption is more often correct than my belief about myself is correct about others, as well. Any experimental data?

 

[delcrossv]

The only time I dump a gun is when it really doesn't fit my hand. Dumped a nice Berretta because I hated the way- too- far- forward trigger (most of which was wasted in take up).

Else, I'll make an effort to "make it work". E.G.: I went through a couple of holsters before I found one that works with my Pre 29 (probably should have gone to A.E. Nelson in the first place! But live and learn)

 

[lihpster]

Dumped a nice Berretta because I hated the way- too- far- forward trigger (most of which was wasted in take up).

I had a Taurus PT92. Hated the trigger. Couldn't get used to it and shot the gun poorly. Others shot it well, just not me. Kept it for several years and tried to learn the trigger. Finally sold it and moved on to a 1911.

 

[Goldstar225]

If I can adapt the gun to work for me I will. If I can't, it goes down the road. My most common issue has been the size of the grip and/or trigger reach. As an example, for a 1911 that means a short trigger, flat MSH and slim grips.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

Detonics Pocket 9.
What a Neat Looking Gun!
Unlocked Breech 9mm.
Got stacked recoil springs similar to Caterpillar Tractors.

 

[Spats McGee]

Looking at my history, I guess I always tried to adapt first. It was part of a period of "getting to know" my new gun. With each new carry gun, I spent 3-4 years with it, and then decided to move on to a new pistol.

 

[Echo40]

Interesting question. I think your question presumes that adapt-vs-abandon is some sort of personal quality or personality choice that governs most decisions, at least on guns. In my case, I believe that the governing factor is the actual set of facts in each individual case, or at least my estimate of those facts. I have done both. In hindsight, I am not sure that I was always right.

I do not know whether your presumption is more often correct than my belief about myself is correct about others, as well. Any experimental data?

Nope, I'm not presuming anything, nor am I insinuating anything, I'm merely asking a question.

Folks often see things in my posts that aren't there, thinking I'm making some sort of stealth statement, but I'm not.

Trust me, I'm not shy about speaking my mind, even if my opinions are unpopular or go against the grain, you can see my post history for evidence of this. So if I had any strong feelings towards those who would rather trade in a firearm that doesn't quite satisfy them, then I would simply come out and say it.

Obviously, not everyone has the time to adapt to a firearm or adapt said firearm to better suit them, because trouble doesn't wait until it's convenient to happen, so when you need a firearm for self-defense, you need it ready to go ASAP. So yeah, I'm not so presumptuous as to think that folks who would rather swap out a firearm in favor of a more suitable replacement are in the wrong, in fact it makes perfect sense.

The only thing that confuses me is when someone buys a new gun to replace an older carry gun, loves it at first, (raves about it online) then discovers something they don't quite like about it, (i.e. something non-serious that couldn't prevent it from saving their life, just something not to their liking) and their immediate course of action is to replace it.
In other words, they clearly liked the gun enough to choose it as a replacement for a gun that they had previously carried, but then something about it just turns them off to it to the point that they don't even want to bother with it anymore.
I don't fault them for it, but I don't really understand it either, you know?

 

[Sevens]

Sometimes the simple and easiest answer is the correct one.

Gun crazy gun cranks look for reasons or excuses to buy the next gun.

 

[hkcavalier]

Tried several EDCs and settled on the G26. No desire to look into one of the newer subcompacts with capacities that start with "1".

Would one of them perhaps be "better" for me? Maybe. But I look at every gun as a system. Parts, ammo, mags, holsters, long term support are critical too...once reliability, accuracy, and ergonomics have been established as satisfactory for the given gun.

 

[mtgianni]

I am surprised at what I see as regular, intelligent people who can all of a sudden loose confidence in an item. I include myself in this. A factory round failing to feed or fire will set that brand of ammo off for me for decades. A irritation when adapting a gun to different clothing will change it out.
I consider myself a revolver guy, but if I lay off shooting for a few months, the autos group better than the revolvers.
I try to go with what works but am quick to change rather than adapt. Fortunately I have options to do so.

 

[SMSgt]

I've got 5 semiautos in four different calibers, no two guns of the same make. I shoot them all about the same regardless of different triggers and "fit." They are all 100% reliable with any ammo I shoot, including the 9x18 cases made from 9x19 cases. I just don't have the issues with guns that others seem to have. I pull the trigger and they go bang and hit where I'm aiming.

 

[gen3guy]

It took me 65 years to figure out that a J frame with a boot grip was the perfect carry gun for me. My ego would have me walking around with a 629. A snubbie, of course.

 

[lrrifleman]

A very interesting question. I live in a state where you are required to obtain a permit to purchase, which can be rather aggravating. Therefore, I tend to research my impending purchases rather thoroughly.

I was weaned on the 1911 platform, so I won't hesitate to purchase a 1911 with a long trigger, it's an easy swap. When it comes to revolvers, changing grips is not an issue. I won't purchase a semi-auto that doesn't fit my hand, that is why I've avoided Glocks until they introduced the Gen 5. For the Sigs I've won, I have been fortunate that they fit my hand, or different sized grip modules have been available.

In most respects, I guess that I am in the adapt category, since I really can't afford to abandon a handgun. When I initially read this post, I read it as adapting my shooting style to the gun, not adapting the gun to me. Being disabled, I will lean more towards a handgun with an ambidextrous slide release, followed by an ambidextrous slide safety, since my "weak hand" truly is MY WEAK HAND.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

I am surprised at what I see as regular, intelligent people who can all of a sudden loose confidence in an item. I include myself in this. A factory round failing to feed or fire will set that brand of ammo off for me for decades.

I am not at all surprised. This is, whether thoughtfully examined or not, a logical and correct reaction to a defensive weapon system. It is rare that a very careful investigation of the relevant facts and science will logically override this human reaction.

 

[Buford57]

Adapt (or attempt to correct) is my initial reaction. I spent a lot of time and ammo trying to make a Remington R51 work well enough to use as a second string replacement. And did. I later sold it, working properly.

Same with a RM380. The ONLY problem with this gun is the tendency of the takedown pin to drop out when the slide is retracted very slowly when the gun is held in the "Detroit cant". My current fix is a small piece of black duct tape. I intend to fit it with a properly sized rubber plug, once I find one. I wrote to Remington at one point to suggest that they move the hole to the right side. They were indignant that I critiqued their design. In every other respect this little gun is so superior to every other gun in its class I've tried that I really want it to work.

I will invest my time, energy and $ into a gun before I give up on it, but if the issue is reliability, I will not carry it until the issue is resolved.