Can a Glock be a Precision tool?

[Ar180shooter]

This group was shot in about 10 seconds at 7-10m. I shot it with my P99, and I shoot my Glock better.

I find this group relatively unimpressive, and it is about fist sized. Any combat pistol should easily be capable of besting that group, when used by a decent shooter.

 

[TDC]

This group was shot in about 10 seconds at 7-10m. I shot it with my P99, and I shoot my Glock better.

I find this group relatively unimpressive, and it is about fist sized. Any combat pistol should easily be capable of besting that group, when used by a decent shooter.

The question you have to ask is this. Are you looking for effective groups within a certain size? Or are you looking for the smallest group possible within a certain time frame? Your group isn't Olympic level stuff but its effective with regards to the target. Faster shooting with same group would be better, if that's the intent.

TDC

 

[mudgunner49]

Originally Posted by Onagoth
Just to put that in perspective, thats about 12 MOA.... Not really what I consider precision. Show me a pistol that does 2" at 50y and I'm impressed.

(1) Are you kidding me? 2', at 150 feet with a handheld pistol? Are you able to do that??? wtf.

(1). Pretty much any day. If I couldn't I'd hang up my spurs - I can generally keep a full magazine on the head of a Fig. 11 at that range with a sloppy old worn out service Browning. If I couldn't do better with any one of my wheelguns, Glock's, M&P's or either of my P7's, or my MkIII Hi Power I'd probably quit shooting.
150' is NOT a long handgun shot...

 

[Popurhedoff]

Using a B-27 target at 7-10 yards, I can put them all in the 10 ring, I practice out to 300 yards with my Glock. I regularly practice at 100 yards and in. At my local range I was asked if I could hit an 8" steel gong hanging on a chain from 180 yards... I hit it over and over again. I then taught the other 8 shooters to do the same with their own pistols and revolvers... The Club President even hit it with his old Model 29 revolver and was doing the "Snoopy Dance"... all pistols are capable of being accurate, practice more, hit more. After hitting targets further out, it will get easier to get tight groups close in.

 

[plinker 777]

300 yards with your Glock you say...good on you. I struggle with that yardage with my enfield .303, from a bench, on a calm day, before I've had a coffee and using breathing control. But that's me.

 

[redryder]

Some of these claims are absolutely bullllfnnnnshiiiite. Pistols are 100 yard and under tools that should be thrown aside quickly should a rifle become available.

 

[mudgunner49]

Some of these claims are absolutely bullllfnnnnshiiiite. Pistols are 100 yard and under tools that should be thrown aside quickly should a rifle become available.

Really??? I've taken no small sum of money from folks who felt as you do and who had the huevos to put their money where their mouths were.

And I don't think that anyone was suggesting replacing a rifle with a handgun, but remember, just because you can't don't assume that someone else can't either - dangerous assumption...

 

[Popurhedoff]

Some of these claims are absolutely bullllfnnnnshiiiite. Pistols are 100 yard and under tools that should be thrown aside quickly should a rifle become available.

Really??? I guess you dont spend that much time on the range and also beleive that the bullets stop and drop at 100 yards?

There are many CGN'ers have seen me hit 8"x 11" sheets of paper at 100 yards with my pistol, and hit the gongs at 180 yards.

If you limit your mind to the that beleif, then that is all you will be able to accomplish. Of course a rifle is better at longer ranges than a pistol, and if no rifle is available, well then your stuck aren't you, better make the most of it.

Shooting paper and gongs at a range is just pure fun, you should try it, you may even surprise yourself.

I work daily on the two way ranges here in Afganistan, if I limit myself and my capabilities, well then its a very bad day at the office. When I am home and at the ranges its just for fun, sh1T'S and Giggles and I will take and try any challenge with a handgun.

 

[GunGuy34]

Really??? I guess you dont spend that much time on the range and also beleive that the bullets stop and drop at 100 yards?

There are many CGN'ers have seen me hit 8"x 11" sheets of paper at 100 yards with my pistol, and hit the gongs at 180 yards.

If you limit your mind to the that beleif, then that is all you will be able to accomplish. Of course a rifle is better at longer ranges than a pistol, and if no rifle is available, well then your stuck aren't you, better make the most of it.

Shooting paper and gongs at a range is just pure fun, you should try it, you may even surprise yourself.

I work daily on the two way ranges here in Afganistan, if I limit myself and my capabilities, well then its a very bad day at the office. When I am home and at the ranges its just for fun, sh1T'S and Giggles and I will take and try any challenge with a handgun.

I think he means, that they are not ideal out past 50 yards let alone 100 or 200. Hickok45 has videos hitting the gong all the time at 80 yards, and a few i think out to 230, but nothing beats a rifle at those ranges.

 

[misanthropist]

I think he means, that they are not ideal out past 50 yards let alone 100 or 200. Hickok45 has videos hitting the gong all the time at 80 yards, and a few i think out to 230, but nothing beats a rifle at those ranges.

I would say that "these claims are bull####" doesn't really need much translation.

I have not personally shot a pistol past about 110m, but I did find that I was able to hit an 8" gong at that distance within a few tries, and once I had figured out the hold it was fairly straightforward to repeat it with about a 50% success rate. And shooting is not my job...it's just something I do for fun once in a while. If I were hanging around Afghanistan on the company dime I would take shooting pretty seriously and I'd be much, much better at it. Both of the posters in the previous posts who are making claims about shooting accurately at distance are legitimate, established shooters with nothing to prove here. The claims are very unlikely to be made up for the purpose of impressing a few hobbyists.

Obviously a rifle is better further out...it's better close in, too.

 

[GunGuy34]

I would say that "these claims are bulls**t" doesn't really need much translation.

I have not personally shot a pistol past about 110m, but I did find that I was able to hit an 8" gong at that distance within a few tries, and once I had figured out the hold it was fairly straightforward to repeat it with about a 50% success rate. And shooting is not my job...it's just something I do for fun once in a while. If I were hanging around Afghanistan on the company dime I would take shooting pretty seriously and I'd be much, much better at it. Both of the posters in the previous posts who are making claims about shooting accurately at distance are legitimate, established shooters with nothing to prove here. The claims are very unlikely to be made up for the purpose of impressing a few hobbyists.

Obviously a rifle is better further out...it's better close in, too.

Yabut what does Larry Vickers and Kevin Hawthorne say?

 

[TinkerBell]

Yabut what does Larry Vickers and Kevin Hawthorne say?

considering larry vickers did an episode of tactv where he was shooting a glock20 and hitting plates @ 250yds I am sure he agrees that handguns can be effective at range.

also note ted nugent shoots his glock 20 out to 150 yds all the time as well.... and has taken everything from deer to wild bore with it.

 

[GunGuy34]

considering larry vickers did an episode of tactv where he was shooting a glock20 and hitting plates @ 250yds I am sure he agrees that handguns can be effective at range.

also note ted nugent shoots his glock 20 out to 150 yds all the time as well.... and has taken everything from deer to wild bore with it.

well then....would love to know how many shots it took and shot placement.

 

[redryder]

That is amazing shooting for sure if you can consistently hit an 8" gong at 180 yds. Great shooting and congratulations. I have a hard time even seeing an 8" gong at 180 yds these days, but younger eyes do make a difference. Just out of curiousity, has anyone strapped there standard Glock into a Ransom Rest and shot a group out at those distances? I haven't seen a whole lot of glocks (or any for that matter) shoot a 2" group at 50 yds consistently. Even 2" at 50 is working out to a minimum 8" at 200 in a perfect world.

 

[mudgunner49]

Yabut what does Larry Vickers and Kevin Hawthorne say?

Who the H3ll is "Kevin Hawthorne"??? Ken Hackathorn perhaps????

 

[StrikerSW]

So this sounds like fun, I don't doubt this is possible ......... and challenging. I have been thinking about shooting out to 100 meters. I'll take my Glock 17 out next Sunday and give it a try. I'll be happy just to hit a B27 target at 100 meters. Lets see what the average shooter can come up with. Anybody else game, even if you use another handgun?

 

[Ganderite]

Good accuracy is a function of the time and distance of the shot. In CQB we shoot at a 6" bull at 25 and 10 yards. Not a very difficult bull to hit, except it is a fihgure target, not a nice big balck bull.

And we have 20 seconds to fire 4 shots from the rifle, clear it, draw the pistol, rack it and then fire 5 shots at each of two targets. The challenge is shooting both accurately and quickly.

I know at least one of the shooters on Sunday got 10 bulls with his pistol (a Glock in 40S&W). I did not. I was using a Norinco 1911 in 9mm.

 

[GunGuy34]

Who the H3ll is "Kevin Hawthorne"??? Ken Hackathorn perhaps????

dunno, was being sarcastic as folks like to throw those names around a lot.

 

[Ar180shooter]

The question you have to ask is this. Are you looking for effective groups within a certain size? Or are you looking for the smallest group possible within a certain time frame? Your group isn't Olympic level stuff but its effective with regards to the target. Faster shooting with same group would be better, if that's the intent.

TDC

Exactly, it depends on what you want to do with your pistol.

 

[Onagoth]

I am not arguing that you can't convert a handgun grouping to MOA... I can also convert my daily commute to light years... but the number is absolutely irrelevant to any discussion on precision relative to the instrument.

We don't measure a car speed in knots or feet per second...because those numbers are useless to you as a driver. I don't want to get into a big debate here on the chronic misuse of the term/concept "MOA" by shooters, so I will leave it at this.

You've obviously missed the point. The thread isn't about whether or not glocks are 'accurate' or 'good enough'....its about whether or not they are a 'precision' tool.

The term precision infers the highest degree of accuracy. As Pat as pointed out above, handgun groups of 1-2" at 100 yards are achievable. Therefore my post about 2" at 50 y is somewhat of a valid approach for determining 'precision'. This is absolutely in the realm of MOA measurements, but that concept seems to be beyond you.

Anyhow, feel free to keep discussing how a 3" group at 7 yards is 'precision'