How much difference does the gun make?

[grimreefer]

Buy the CZ... it's what you want.

Practice practice practice.

I much prefer lighter, polymer, striker fired pistols myself. However, having shot a lot of rounds through a friends Shadow 2, it's a great pistol. IMO you will be happy with the purchase for a very long time.

It's a pretty gun, and it feels good in the hand, but I can say the same about my Walther. I'm not sure that I want it yet. I will have to ask someone to try it at the range.

Why do you prefer polymer striker guns?

 

[bluesclues]

There are 2 main reasons I personally prefer the polymer striker fired pistols.

#1. They are generally lighter than all steel guns like the Shadow. For me, the lighter guns seems more weildy (sp?) and requires less effort to draw and move around.

I do not feel that the heavier guns reduce perceived recoil enough to make the extra weight worth the effort.

#2. Reliability. Personally, I have never had a polymer pistol fail me in a match. My XD40 and M&P have always just worked every time without failure.

These are just my opinions. And yes, I am sure the CZ's are every bit as reliable as I'm sure many here can attest to.

I have read horror stories of the bad triggers, short sight radius, frame flex and mediocre accuracy associated with polymer pistols but, that has not been my experience.

Plus, shooting mostly 3 gun, I have never felt bad sliding my $600 "plastic fantastic" into a dump bucket or onto a drum or table. Magazine's are cheap and readily available as are holsters and mag pouches. These pistols are used as sporting equipment and have been flawless after years of service.

 

[2bore]

42!

 

[VanMan]

I've seen people competing with a Walther P99. On a mag change during a stage, one guy kept getting his hand caught in that little step just behind the mag well. He had a big blood blister on the heel of his left palm by the end of the day. Didn't see him compete with that Walther after that.

I've tried shooting a Walther, it seemed to have a lot more muzzle flip, even using my 132pf 147gr reloads.

Have a look at the Grand Power X-Calibur. It's polymer framed, but the slide rides in a full steel insert. It's hammer fired too so you get a nice smooth ~7lb DA trigger pull for the first shot, and a great ~2lb SA trigger pull thereafter. The unique rotating barrel really soaks up the recoil, so that although lighter than the Shadow, there is less felt recoil and muzzle flip. I started off shooting Production with my CZ SP01 Shadow, but quickly switched to the X-Calibur. The Shadow just doesn't get much range time anymore ....

 

[grimreefer]

I started reading Brian Enos' book tonight. After getting through the "there is no spoon" type stuff, it seems his theory is letting the gun recoil, and not trying to clamp down on the gun. Instead, his goal is completly consistant recoil, so that the amount of muzzle flip isn't really important, as the sights effortly settle down right where they started.

Then again this book was written 10 years before Production division even existed. An updated edition would be nice...

 

[Born Under a Bad Sign]

Well since you consider the advice I offer that is based on my experience....no I wouldn't care to explain anything to you.

John

I've seen both you and Unregistered shoot. Sorry, but I'll take his advice over yours without reservation.

 

[grimreefer]

There are 2 main reasons I personally prefer the polymer striker fired pistols.

#1. They are generally lighter than all steel guns like the Shadow. For me, the lighter guns seems more weildy (sp?) and requires less effort to draw and move around.

I do not feel that the heavier guns reduce perceived recoil enough to make the extra weight worth the effort.

#2. Reliability. Personally, I have never had a polymer pistol fail me in a match. My XD40 and M&P have always just worked every time without failure.

These are just my opinions. And yes, I am sure the CZ's are every bit as reliable as I'm sure many here can attest to.

I have read horror stories of the bad triggers, short sight radius, frame flex and mediocre accuracy associated with polymer pistols but, that has not been my experience.

Plus, shooting mostly 3 gun, I have never felt bad sliding my $600 "plastic fantastic" into a dump bucket or onto a drum or table. Magazine's are cheap and readily available as are holsters and mag pouches. These pistols are used as sporting equipment and have been flawless after years of service.

That's a really great point about not being afraid to beat it up a bit. We only have 3-4 3 gun matches in my area per year, but after my first match last season I am all about it...

I've seen people competing with a Walther P99. On a mag change during a stage, one guy kept getting his hand caught in that little step just behind the mag well. He had a big blood blister on the heel of his left palm by the end of the day. Didn't see him compete with that Walther after that.

I've tried shooting a Walther, it seemed to have a lot more muzzle flip, even using my 132pf 147gr reloads.

Have a look at the Grand Power X-Calibur. It's polymer framed, but the slide rides in a full steel insert. It's hammer fired too so you get a nice smooth ~7lb DA trigger pull for the first shot, and a great ~2lb SA trigger pull thereafter. The unique rotating barrel really soaks up the recoil, so that although lighter than the Shadow, there is less felt recoil and muzzle flip. I started off shooting Production with my CZ SP01 Shadow, but quickly switched to the X-Calibur. The Shadow just doesn't get much range time anymore ....

I haven't had any issues with getting my hand pinched. In my first pistol match last week I did fumble quite a few reloads due to the paddle design of the mag release. Chalking that up to lack of practice reloading. I'm good with getting a fresh mag into the gun, but the release killed me more than a few times. I've been focusing on trigger pull, transitions, grip...left out reloads and practiced night before the match. Doh. I've stippled the paddle now as well so my finger is less likely to slip off.

The Grand Power X-Calibur looks pretty cool.

 

[VanMan]

here's what I learned from ~20 years of playing golf. In general, I'm thinking it can be applied here too:

poor equipment + poor technique = crappy performance
good equipment + poor technique = crappy and/or inconsistent performance
poor equipment + good technique = good performance
good equipment + good technique = great performance

A consistent message is "you can't buy a better game" - ie a $700 golf club or $2000 gun won't make you a better golfer or shooter. Good technique and practice is the only way to go for that.

Having a good technique so that your sights settle down consistently to the POA of your first shot is fundamental. Using a gun with less recoil/muzzle flip along with that technique will speed up your splits and score you more A's. jmho

Now on the other hand, there's nothing wrong with buying a handgun cause you like it and it's pretty ....

 

[Kidd X]

Buy it if you want. If you think splits and transitions are going to win you a match then you have bigger issues then what gun you shoot.

Here's the winner! Splits and transitions don't buy you a lot of time, making hits and being smooth and methodical do.

 

[Onagoth]

here's what I learned from ~20 years of playing golf. In general, I'm thinking it can be applied here too:

poor equipment + poor technique = crappy performance
good equipment + poor technique = crappy and/or inconsistent performance
poor equipment + good technique = good performance
good equipment + good technique = great performance

A consistent message is "you can't buy a better game" - ie a $700 golf club or $2000 gun won't make you a better golfer or shooter. Good technique and practice is the only way to go for that.

Having a good technique so that your sights settle down consistently to the POA of your first shot is fundamental. Using a gun with less recoil/muzzle flip along with that technique will speed up your splits and score you more A's. jmho

Now on the other hand, there's nothing wrong with buying a handgun cause you like it and it's pretty ....

I totally disagree with this based on my 20years of golf experience.

Clubs manufactured today are a million times more forgiving than the ####ty 7 piece Walmart set that I started with.

My golf game improved significantly when I invested in decent Clubs.... I still don't play like tiger but way better than what I did. Mi####s specifically go far straighter and higher than they would with a worse club

This is the age old Indian vs archer argument.... Which I always thought was a bad analogy given that arrows aren't used in warfare anymore (ie, they were replaced with better technology)

 

[Chas59]

I'm currently shooting a Walther P99 9mm for action pistol / 3gun. I don't have experience with any other pistol for competition, but I know I want to stay within Production class. My fundamentals are good, and I've done well for my limited competition experience and am quite satisfied at this point. I am more than happy to put in the time and effort to excell with my current setup, or any setup for that matter.

However, I recently walked into my LGS and handled the CZ Shadow 2 which is more than DOUBLE the weight and a lower bore axis than my Walther. That has to make a difference in recoil and speed, right? How much of a difference would this make to an experienced competition shooter?

I noticed even less recoil with my Shadow 2 compared to my SP01 Shadowline, however whatever you shoot best is best for you.

 

[VanMan]

I've played in too many foursomes with people trotting out the latest and greatest drivers, putters, super-duper new fangled rescue clubs. If they had a crappy and/or inconsistent swing, they had a crappy game.

What got me to a 9 handicap was not the latest and greatest Big Bertha (I've got quite a few in the basement ) It was taking lessons and lots and lots of practice - especially the short game I used to take a range session or two with my golf pro at the beginning of the season to make sure my swing and form were solid. But again, that's just my experience

I totally disagree with this based on my 20years of golf experience.

Clubs manufactured today are a million times more forgiving than the ####ty 7 piece Walmart set that I started with.

My golf game improved significantly when I invested in decent Clubs.... I still don't play like tiger but way better than what I did. Mi####s specifically go far straighter and higher than they would with a worse club

This is the age old Indian vs archer argument.... Which I always thought was a bad analogy given that arrows aren't used in warfare anymore (ie, they were replaced with better technology)

 

[Dmitri_W]

I always thought a different gun would make me a better shooter. After lots of wasted money on latest and greatest, and a few years of developing bad habits, I saw one of the pro shooters shoot my gun.

That was a turning point in my shooting. Gun helps but countless hours of practice is what really does it.

Good gun removes the excuse of me not to practice, but it does not make me a better/good shooter.

 

[VanMan]

to answer your other question, this is me and my daughter. I took up archery with her a couple of years ago and we both took lessons and gradually upgraded from the club bows to buying our own. The "indian" with better technique will consistently win over the the "indian" with bad technique and fancy equipment. But again, that's just my experience.

 

[Onagoth]

The photo is proof that equipment matters... Its not all about technique

 

[VanMan]

The photo is proof that equipment matters... Its not all about technique

no question, a certain level of decent equipment is needed. You will get quickly diminishing returns on buying more expensive equipment. The bow I'm shooting in this pic is a $100 PSE I bought 2nd hand. If I had bought a $900 Hoyt GPX riser, it would not have made me a 9X better archer. That tall fella with the binoculars behind us is consistently ranked as one of the top 5 Olympic recurve target archers in Canada. There's no question he could out shoot most of us with a bare club bow.

btw - I happened to win that club match with my $100 2nd hand bow and aluminum jazz arrows. That's competing with people with their very expensive bows, carbon arrows, etc .....

 

[Onagoth]

I think that is what's key here.... The diminishing returns of equipment upgrades... I tend to think that any handgun in action shooting needs to have decent sights and a semi decent trigger to perform, and be 100% reliable .... But things like a flared magwell improve performance much less so.

However... There always seems to be the idea that any gun is good enough when the requisite skills are there, I disagree with that notion and it seems to me that people are handicapping themselves with that attitude

 

[Freedom Ventures]

Some guns suck for our game, some guns are made for our game.

In between, there are just compromises and excuses.

If you're just shooting for fun; then shoot anything but your best chance of succeeding is to have one of the guns made for the game

Oh, and FYI...the entire IPSC Canada Production team headed to the Worlds in France this year are shooting Tanfoglio ...

 

[VanMan]

I think that is what's key here.... The diminishing returns of equipment upgrades... I tend to think that any handgun in action shooting needs to have decent sights and a semi decent trigger to perform, and be 100% reliable .... But things like a flared magwell improve performance much less so.

However... There always seems to be the idea that any gun is good enough when the requisite skills are there, I disagree with that notion and it seems to me that people are handicapping themselves with that attitude

yep, agree with you. That's why I said:

"poor equipment + good technique = good performance
good equipment + good technique = great performance"

It's all relative though. To an D or C class shooter, a good versus a "great" gun won't make much of a difference, while training and good technique will make a significant difference. A B/A class shooter has good technique already, so they will notice more improvement with something purpose built for our sport. I'm not sure the M/GM's are actually human ....

 

[emerson]

If you think improving your splits and transitions WON'T win you a match then you have a flawed understanding of competitive shooting. Transitions, whether between targets or between firearms in multigun disciplines, are absolutely key! Good consistent splits are also very important.

If you are shooting a single gun discipline a key is to work on your target transitions until they are as close as possible to your splits.......that is a basic building block to improving overall speed.

Foot speed and all that is important but I have seen a lot of older guys kick the crap out of younger guys just because of their splits and transitions (of either variety)......and how they use the time between target engagements.

John

Gold here. It's how old guys remain competitive. Smarter, not harder.