Lowering the Bar

[BE Mike]

^^^^ This!

I had a 22 that keyholed at 20 ft about 30% of the time. It was still mechanically more accurate than I am.

Wow, you really lowered the bar!

 

[wcd]

I understand how to test for group accuracy. I think perhaps you've misunderstood the question, as ransom rest testing has nothing to do with split times, draw times, and their role in a metric for "what's good enough for a carry pistol". I was asking how he came up with his time limits, not how do you see how accurate a given pistol is.

Yes I did misunderstand, Not intending to question your knowledge, I thought you were asking how I came up with the conclusion the P365 was plenty accurate For me.

As far as I know I think I am using the correct method to determine which ammo works best for me.

As far as suitability for a carry gun my testing has little to do with determining which handgun is going to be best for someone.

Agreed standing still taking slow deliberate shots has little to do with a defensive use.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Yes I did misunderstand, Not intending to question your knowledge, I thought you were asking how I came up with the conclusion the P365 was plenty accurate For me.

Maybe you meant to quote someone else? I responded to Route45's post, not yours. No worries either way, I was just a bit confused.

 

[ECS686]

Sometimes it seems some folks expect way to much out of a "normal" carry gun. By normal I am referring to Glock 19,43, Sig 365 etc.

Carry guns are not PPC revolvers. And thats OK.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Sometimes it seems some folks expect way to much out of a "normal" carry gun. By normal I am referring to Glock 19,43, Sig 365 etc.

Carry guns are not PPC revolvers. And thats OK.

I wish @Sylvain could chime in. He had some really good (recent) history of the use of the MR 73 by the French Gendarmerie and RAID and GIGN (the last two being SWAT type agencies. I think GIGN is a specialized anti-terrorist response force, but don't hold me to that.

Manurhin MR 73: A famous revolver used by GIGN

The Manurhin MR 73 is a compact revolver basically intended for police use, though the longer-barreled versions can also be bought in competition form.

special-ops.org

 

[russc2542]

I'm guessing that any maker who has that standard is trying to reduce warranty claims by people that can't shoot any better. user says "I was aiming right at the target every time, it must be the gun" and calls the mfr wanting warranty work. The bar is set to minimize the customer service people having to tell gun owners they can't shoot for ****.

 

[DadSmith]

This is even better than 3" at 15 yards.

 

[wcd]

Maybe you meant to quote someone else? I responded to Route45's post, not yours. No worries either way, I was just a bit confused.

This is what I get for responding to posts when I should be sleeping lol.

 

[BE Mike]

Sometimes it seems some folks expect way to much out of a "normal" carry gun. By normal I am referring to Glock 19,43, Sig 365 etc.

Carry guns are not PPC revolvers. And thats OK.

Actually, it looks to me that many folks don't expect enough out of "normal" carry guns. I actually think that most of the better quality ones will shoot accurately. I don't understand why so many consumers would accept such low manufacturer's standards. Is it because they can't shoot?

 

[Ark]

This is even better than 3" at 15 yards.

It is crazy how accurate cap and ball revolvers can actually be. Mine would stack holes if I could shoot them better.

 

[Gabriel]

I'm guessing that any maker who has that standard is trying to reduce warranty claims by people that can't shoot any better. user says "I was aiming right at the target every time, it must be the gun" and calls the mfr wanting warranty work. The bar is set to minimize the customer service people having to tell gun owners they can't shoot for ****.

This.

 

[Route 45]

Actually, it looks to me that many folks don't expect enough out of "normal" carry guns. I actually think that most of the better quality ones will shoot accurately. I don't understand why so many consumers would accept such low manufacturer's standards. Is it because they can't shoot?

So many consumers? Just how many different makes and models have you personally tried to come to this conclusion that standards are low and nobody knows how to shoot?

Pappy always used to say that if it smells like **** everywhere you go, check your shoe.

 

[BE Mike]

I'm guessing that any maker who has that standard is trying to reduce warranty claims by people that can't shoot any better. user says "I was aiming right at the target every time, it must be the gun" and calls the mfr wanting warranty work. The bar is set to minimize the customer service people having to tell gun owners they can't shoot for ****.

So many consumers? Just how many different makes and models have you personally tried to come to this conclusion that standards are low and nobody knows how to shoot?

Pappy always used to say that if it smells like **** everywhere you go, check your shoe.

The manufactures have set these low standards. I'm thinking that with gun sales at an all time high and big contracts, the manufacturers don't feel the need for higher standards. If you read my post #49, you'll see that I am not blaming the quality of the product.

 

[russc2542]

The manufactures have set these low standards. I'm thinking that with gun sales at an all time high and big contracts, the manufacturers don't feel the need for higher standards. If you read my post #49, you'll see that I am not blaming the quality of the product.

But my premise is: Are the guns actually no better than that standard or is it just they want to have that in writing to fall back on when dealing with ornery customers? Remember a lot of manufacturers can cover more than warranty minimums at their discretion or will cover a lot of things even though they don't have a stated warranty.

For example:
customer A calls in "hey I bought this gun and it doesn't shoot for crap. I aim at the target and it shoots an inch off. You make a junk product and I hate you. gimme a new one." CS says "too bad so sad, our spec is broad side of a barn".
Customer B calls in says "hi, I shoot bullseye at xx score and yy rifle matches. gun shoots z group and I see some machining marks in the throat (pics attached) that could be causing trouble, would you send me a new barrel?" CS says "hi sorry about your issue, our tech agrees with your assessment so here's a barrel".

I've played that game from both sides, albeit mostly in the automotive field.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

If you think a given manufacturer's bar is too low, why buy their product? One advantage of buying a duty grade gun that's actually purchased and issued by a large .gov organization is that there tend to be accuracy standards for the contract. The FBI's selection process, for example, eliminated any pistol that couldn't hold a 5 shot group to 5" at 25y with bulk ammo, 4" with duty ammo.

 

[BE Mike]

If you think a given manufacturer's bar is too low, why buy their product? One advantage of buying a duty grade gun that's actually purchased and issued by a large .gov organization is that there tend to be accuracy standards for the contract. The FBI's selection process, for example, eliminated any pistol that couldn't hold a 5 shot group to 5" at 25y with bulk ammo, 4" with duty ammo.

So the manufacturers have one standard for the big boys and another for us peons?

 

[BE Mike]

But my premise is: Are the guns actually no better than that standard or is it just they want to have that in writing to fall back on when dealing with ornery customers? Remember a lot of manufacturers can cover more than warranty minimums at their discretion or will cover a lot of things even though they don't have a stated warranty.

For example:
customer A calls in "hey I bought this gun and it doesn't shoot for crap. I aim at the target and it shoots an inch off. You make a junk product and I hate you. gimme a new one." CS says "too bad so sad, our spec is broad side of a barn".
Customer B calls in says "hi, I shoot bullseye at xx score and yy rifle matches. gun shoots z group and I see some machining marks in the throat (pics attached) that could be causing trouble, would you send me a new barrel?" CS says "hi sorry about your issue, our tech agrees with your assessment so here's a barrel".

I've played that game from both sides, albeit mostly in the automotive field.

I think you have the gist of it. Not being a bean counter type, but just another gun guy, my thinking is if the manufactures cared about their reputation, they would proudly brag about the quality, high standards and accuracy of their products. I suppose I'm in the distinct minority.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

So the manufacturers have one standard for the big boys and another for us peons?

No. They have standards for lots of different big boys as well as for the peons. Big boys set standards in order to purchase. Gun must do X, Y, and Z. You should do the same if X, Y, and Z matter to you. Big Boy has likely done the shopping for you and you can just buy the same gun. If you buy a "just as good as" brand, get what you get.

 

[BE Mike]

No. They have standards for lots of different big boys as well as for the peons. Big boys set standards in order to purchase. Gun must do X, Y, and Z. You should do the same if X, Y, and Z matter to you. Big Boy has likely done the shopping for you and you can just buy the same gun. If you buy a "just as good as" brand, get what you get.

I agree and have purposely done that on many occasions. Having said that, once in a while a substandard part or two slip by.

 

[russc2542]

I think you have the gist of it. Not being a bean counter type, but just another gun guy, my thinking is if the manufactures cared about their reputation, they would proudly brag about the quality, high standards and accuracy of their products. I suppose I'm in the distinct minority.

The marketing and warranty/customer service departments have zero contact or communication LOL.

and as someone else mentioned, contracts are totally different.