Last weekend, I decided to do an extensive accuracy comparison between what I believe to be the two most accurate 9mms ever built by Smith & Wesson and certainly two of the most accurate pistols in the world. These two thoroughbred 9mms were largely hand built by Performance Center smiths at the top of their game. I’ll list some statistics and differences, but the comparison is strictly performance-based.

First we have the 5906 PPC with the 6" barrel. These pistols have a near legendary reputation for accuracy. They were only sold to law enforcement back in the day and S&W didn’t make a whole lot of them, so they aren’t nearly as well known as some other less capable target pistols. The PPC9 is based on the 3rd gen 5906, but its similarity stops with the frame and the name. The SAO trigger system and the Briley bushing are two things that really help accuracy. The tight hand fitting and high performance barrel also help. This turns the rather mediocre accuracy of the 5906 into a true world-beater.

The 952 is sort of a single stack civilian version of the great PPC9. As its name would signify, the 952 is also based a great deal on the old 52 bullseye pistol from years back. Like the PPC9, the 952 was also offered in the longslide 6" format. Unlike the PPC9, most of the 952 pistols had a grip safety. I also feel the 952 is a nicer looking handgun, as S&W put more emphasis on the gun’s appearance.

The SAO trigger system in the two pistols is identical. Even the weight of the trigger feels basically the same. The PPC utilizes checkering for the front strap, while the 952's front strap is serrated. The biggest difference between the guns is obviously the width of the grip frame, with the double stack PPC9 being considerably wider. Both guns are heavy weights, which I love. The PPC9 weighs in at 45.6oz empty, while the 952 comes in a little less at 41.0oz empty. Both guns have great target sights. The 952 uses Wilson Combat, while the PPC uses the more fancy Aristocrat sights for competition.

Now for some pics...


















Now for some targets...

All groups were shot resting on a block rest. I still need to get some sand bags, but these work ok for what I do.

Distance was 35 feet, unless otherwise noted. All groups were 5-shot.


PPC9


1/2 inch





1 inch





1 1/8 inches





1 1/4 inches





1 1/4 inches





3/4 inch





1/2 inch





7/8 inch





7/8 inch





1 1/2 inches





1 3/8 inches






1 1/4 inches






1 1/2 inches





1 1/2 inches





1 inch





1 3/8 inches





1 inch








These three were shot at 25 yards.



1/2 inches





2 1/2 inches





2 7/8 inches














952


1 3/8 inches





1 3/8 inches





2 inches





1 inch





5/8 inch





1 1/4 inches





1 1/4 inches





1 inch





1 1/4 inches





1 inch





1 1/8 inches





3/4 inch





1 5/8 inches





1 1/2 inches







These three were shot at 25 yards


1 1/2 inches





2 3/4 inches






2 1/8 inches







35 foot results

PPC9 = .93 inch average
952-2 = 1.22 inch average



In all fairness, I tossed out the 25 yard comparison for a couple of reasons. First, it was a very small sample size of three groups each. Secondly, I have a hard time seeing that far through the sights and putting each shot at the exact same place, even with a rest. A ransom rest is clearly needed for that distance and it would also improve accuracy at the shorter distance. The key to testing accuracy is to remove all other factors, including human error. I would fully expect a ransom to produce better groups at 25 yards than what I was able to do at 35 feet using blocks. Having said all that, the sample size for the 35 foot shooting was fairly extensive at roughly 15 groups each. As you can see, I was clearly able to group the PPC9 a bit better.

Does this make the PPC9 a more accurate firearm? Possibly. I do remember shooting the 952 a little better in the past, so I probably didn’t have my best day. Of course, that may also mean I didn’t shoot the PPC9 as well as I could have either.

Looking back at all my accuracy testing that I’ve done this year, and I’ve determined that the PPC9 produced the best results thus far. In terms of accuracy in my hands, it has bested my Pardini GT9, Sig X-Five, Hi Power Competition, Sphinx Competitor, CZ 75 Champion and Tactical Sport, Smith & Wesson 52, Performance Center 952-1, 952-1, 845, and 945, MAB PAPF1, Bernardelli Practical VB, two Delta Top Guns, Ultramatic SV, and LV, HK P9S Sport, Benelli MP3S, and Walther P88 Competition, Korriphila HSP701, and a few high end 1911s.

I haven’t tested a Sig P210 yet, but I plan on making a huge epic thread just on those guns in the near future. I’ll take all of mine to the range at the same time and test only them. In addition to those, I have a few other target pistols to test as well.

Whether the Sig P210 can match this juggernaut of a pistol, I have no idea. All I know is that the Smith & Wesson PPC9 is an absolutely phenomenal performer. As unscientific as this test was, I can certainly determine that much.

Hope you enjoyed the read. Thanks