Very pleased with G17s accuracy at 25 yards.
- Thread starter Sititunga
- Start date
It took me 4-5 hundred rounds to get used to my G17.After ALOT of practice things get better,Trust me.
Don't suffer in silence, do the 25 cent trigger job, and install a lighter connector; you won't burn so much money in ammo trying to get used to the stock Glock trigger.
Firstly Glock stock triggers are lousy, and the Glock is not a good choice for someone starting out shooting or even for many who have lots of experience. They weren't designed to be accurate guns, just reliable. There are lots of new comers out there that buy Glocks as a first gun and settle for mediocre to appalling accuracy thinking this is the norm. Well it's not for most handguns.
I would stick with your 22, practice like hell (it's cheap) then transition back to your Glock, but get the trigger worked on - as described in this post and others. It sounds like your suffering from a bad flinch which is very common - an extremely high percentage of handgun shooters suffer flinching. The best way to cure this is to make up some dummy 9mm rounds and load these in among live bullets in your loaded mags at the range. When your gun chambers a dummy round without you knowing and you squeeze off a shot you'll see yourself flinch, make sure no one is watching because it's a little embarrassing. You want to work on this to the point that you can squeeze off the trigger without knowing there's a dummy round in the chamber and you don't flinch. Master this and your group sizes will shrink substantially.
Last edited:
It took me 4-5 hundred rounds to get used to my G17.After ALOT of practice things get better,Trust me.
DIDO! now its 1 of my fav go to guns at the range
easyrider604
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Greater Vancouver, BC
If I didn't know any better, I'd say you are bragging
Mighty fine shooting, Sititunga!
Mighty fine shooting, Sititunga!
Here's a 25 shot group I shot the other day unsupported offhand at 25 yards with my new G17. It's nice to see that these plastic guns can shoot well.
The black center is 5 inches across, and the inner x ring is 3.5 inches across.
If I didn't know any better, I'd say you are bragging
Mighty fine shooting, Sititunga!
Not bragging just wanted to point out that a bit of trigger work helps to enhance the accuracy of the tupperware. What the gun is capable of now is not brilliant but is substantially more acceptable than what I could do with it before. I've yet to see blinding 25 yard groups shot with stock Glocks, or enhanced Glocks for that matter, 1911s and wheelguns yes. To the Glock purists that like to suffer the bravado of the stock trigger great, but any enhancement in my mind to make them more accurate just makes them more rewarding to shoot.
As Townsend Whelen said, "Only accurate guns are interesting guns". My 17 before the trigger work was not an interesting gun, now it's tweaked my interest.
- Location
- Halifax Nova Scotia
Thanks for all the advice guys.
you have to maintain sight alignment while engaging the trigger
Focus on the front sight, steady press of the trigger and take your time and you should be able to get to 2" groups at 10 yards pretty quick.
Here's the problem with your post and most handgun shooters. Its not the gun that "gets more accurate" its the shooter and their ability to apply the fundamentals. Trigger jobs and custom tuning are nothing but crutches designed to cover up or reduce the shooters poor habits. Hence the popularity of large, heavy, light triggered 1911 guns. A short crisp trigger can cover up a lot of flinch or other poor habits. A SIG in DA or a Glock, will not. Hence people's belief that "Glocks are inaccurate". Its not the firearm/tool that makes the shot, its the shooter.
Learning to shoot with a Glock is probably the best option(or similar DAO/striker fired pistols). The shooter is forced to apply the fundamentals if they expect any kind of respectable accuracy/consistency. There are no crutches or "design features" to compensate for poor form. Its a tool, learn to use it(that means seek professional training) and understand that the fundamentals are the same for all firearms, and its the shooter that produces accurate/consistent groups, not the firearm.
TDC
Well that's the thing Glocks are inherently inaccurate compared to other handguns, even when put in the hands of competent experienced shots. A Glock will never beat a 1911 or wheelgun downrange. They weren't designed for accuracy, just reliability. The point I'm making is that new shooters should not buy Glocks as first guns as it's very hard to learn the shooting fundamentals with a Glock given the diabolical trigger. You wouldn't buy your 5 year old son a 30 speed mountain bike when he's learning to ride, you'd get him a little two wheeler with training wheels - an extreme analogy I know, but makes the point. New shooters should learn the fundamentals on a good 22 revolver or a well made 22 semi-auto like a Ruger. If they don't learn on guns that are inherently accurate and have good triggers they won't lay the foundation of skills needed to shoot a gun like the Glock, with its terrible trigger, well. I've seen too many new shooters buy Glocks as first guns because of the tacticool cache associated with owning one, we see these type of people every time we go to the range and they can't hit a thing.
Last edited:
You're not grasping the concept here. The firearm is accurate, the inherent accuracy of most firearms is far beyond the capability of most users. Glocks are no less accurate than any other pistol on the market. The less than "easy" trigger on them makes it difficult for new and untrained shooters to operate them with any level of proficiency. Its not the gun, its you, the shooter that sucks.
Learning the fundamentals on a pistol with a short and light trigger is ignorant. It fails to illustrate the shooters mistakes and offers a false sense of achievement. Couple that with the reality that 99% of firearms owners have no professional training, and its not surprising that most feel Glocks are inaccurate, or that this add on or that will improve performance. The ironic part of these statements, is that the shooter blames the gun, then feels that more bolt on crap will solve the problem. Never once does the shooter ever believe it is them who needs work. Even though anyone with a firm grasp of the fundamentals can shoot any pistol(or rifle) well regardless of make, model or calibre. The novice or poor shooter still can't see that the problem is him/her.
I've taken two new shooters out in the past month. A coworker who put his ego aside and LISTENED to what I told him. His groups were consistent and respectable at around 5 inches at 7 yards. He had never fired a handgun or any other firearm in his life. Running a Glock 17 with those awful big dot sights. Total rounds fired in his lifetime at this point. About 150.
The second shooter is female, we were at the range not two days ago. Women unlike men have an uncanny ability to LISTEN to instructions and do exactly as they're told. At seven yards she could print a similar 5-6" group with the same Glock 17, and she was shooting rapid fire. As fast as she could reacquire sight picture, she was sending rounds. Four magazines consecutively(I couldn't load them fast enough). Same results were achieved with the AR and iron sights at 25 yards(max distance). Her total round count(in her life) at the end of this trip. 600 combined pistol and rifle.
Poor performance is most likely a result of the shooter. Whether that be due to inexperience or lack of quality instruction, it doesn't really matter. A poor shooter blames his gear or believes he needs special gear to be successful.
TDC
