Are Some Guns Really More Accurate Than Others?

D

Der Grosse

New member
I am deciding between 2 guns (HK USP9 v Beretta 92FS). Cost and capacity are irrelevant to me and I like how both shoot. However, I keep hearing about combat accuracy vs. target accuracy. Since I have only been shooting for a short while, I have no idea what all this means (although I question why anyone who wants a pistol for self-defense would carry a gun with better target accuracy than combat accuracy). The salesmen at the gun stores around here in Detroit are of no help since they seem to prefer whichever gun they carry. So:

1. What do the terms "combat accuracy" and "target accuracy" mean, and is one more prefereable than the other for self defense?

2. Are the HK and Beretta going to be equally accurate?

3. Between the two, why would you prefer one over the other.

Thanks for the help.
 
Depends on who you ask.

SOCOM wanted a max of 2.5 in at 25M for their 45s
FBI wanted 1.5 at 25 for theirs
INS/BP wanted 3 in at 25 yds for their 40s
CHP wants 3 in at 25 yds for their 40s
Indiana SP wanted 6 in at 50 yds for their 40s

Most gunfights take place at less than 20 ft BTW, and the hit ratio is about 25-50% for the better PDs. Groups open up quite a bit when the lead is going both ways?

OTOH, the officer survival rate goes up as the distance increases. I imagine so does the bad guy's? :)

Can't think guns from reputable makers that aren't good enough out of the box today.

On avg my 9/357 SIGs have been the most accurate shooting slow from a rest, the 9 Berettas/BHPs/CZs/HK next, then 9 Glock, Ruger, S&W. 40/45s? SIG/Ruger/HK, Glock, out of the box 1911. Can vary from gun to gun. My SIG 239 in 40 was way more accurate than my Glock 31 in 357. Some guns will beat that gun w this ammo, lose w that ammo.

Shooting fast for Q, not much difference really; Glocks, cocked n locked BHPS/1911s, CZs seem easiest to hit fast with up close, or a revolver w a good trigger.
 
1. What do the terms "combat accuracy" and "target accuracy" mean, and is one more prefereable than the other for self defense?
Click to expand...

There are no formal definitions for those terms. Most shooters would define "combat accuracy" as the ability to hit center mass of someone who's close enough to be a threat -- 6 inch groups at 30 feet? The usual specification for police pistols is something like a 4" group at 25 yards.

To me, "target accuracy" means enough accuracy to be competitive in the most popular handgun marksmanship competition in the United States, NRA Conventional Pistol shooting. The usual standard for that is ten round groups of three inches or less at 50 yards.

Accuracy is like money: all other things being equal, more is better. :) But there is a point of diminishing returns beyond which the quest for additional accuracy is not worthwhile. For a defensive pistol, the conventional wisdom is that anything beyond "combat accuracy" is less important than things like reliability, ergonomics, handiness, cost, capacity, and power.

2. Are the HK and Beretta going to be equally accurate?
Click to expand...

No. The problem is that nothing short of a side by side test of the two individual pistols will tell you which one would win an accuracy contest. I would expect both to be more than "accurate enough".

3. Between the two, why would you prefer one over the other.
Click to expand...

I would prefer the 92FS because I've shot one and liked it while I've never shot a USP.
 
Also, target guns have closer tolerences (ie. they are "tighter") than combat guns. The tighter tolerences lead to more consistent mechanical lock up, hence greater accuracy. Combat guns are held to loose tolerences in order to make them more reliable.
 
FWIW, for me, my USP45C is more accurate than my 8045 Cougar, shooting side x side. My opniion is that, out of the box, the 9mm USP is likely to be more accurate than the 92fs, but ultimately, the only way to know for sur, is to shoot each side by side. Neither is a bad choice, go with what feels best in hand for you. M2
 
My bet is that the 92FS would be a hair more accurate, but not enough to make accuracy the deciding factor between these two pistols. Either of them would be far more than adequate in that department.

Glocks are reputed to score low in the accuracy department (or so I have been told), but I have no problem hitting paper plates out to 50 yards with either my G19 or my G21. I'd call that better than acceptable, wouldn't you?

Shoot them both. Buy the one that "feels" better. In the long run, that will have a greater impact on your accuracy than almost any other factor.
 
BB makes an important point. Match guns are built to tight tolerances, which makes them more accurate, like any machine. Less free play, more repeatability of results. Problem is, with very tight tolerances, changes in temperature or grit in the machine can affect reliability. Some tight match guns have feed/cycle problems in very cold weather.

Since I shoot primarily for self-defense (quit hunting years ago) "combat accuracy" is good enough for me, given 100% reliability. I consider a gun combat accurate if I can empty it into a 6" circle at 7 yards rapid fire and shoot 3" groups of 5 shots in slow measured fire, same distance. The 6" groups equate to torso hits, the 3" to head shots. In a combat situation, I don't expect to have time to line up a careful shot all the time.
 
Different guns (even matching pairs) can be unbelievably different in terms of accuracy.

"Ulitmate accuracy" would be a better term, and only you can decide what is enough accuracy from your gun.
I personally like the MOST accuracy possible, because it gives me confidence.

Both of your choices could offer the same accuracy.

I prefer the pistol that I feel most comfortable with, so make YOUR choice based on the one YOU like best. Both are very good, so there is no 'bad' choice.


Don't forget ammo LOL.
 
Yes, and "some girls are bigger than others"

Couldn't resist. Allow me a little political incorrectness.:D
 
"I have no idea what all this means (although I question why anyone who wants a pistol for self-defense would carry a gun with better target accuracy than combat accuracy)." The reason is because some guys want the best equipment they can get. They don't settle for something that is "good enough". That is like saying "I don't understand why anyone would want a car that was capable of going over the speed limit".
We always hear these quotes about how most defensive encounters occur within 7 yards or whatever. What about the rest of them ? And what if you are defending your life at a range further than that ? Would you take comfort in the fact that you settled for "combat accuracy " or would you feel more comfortable with an edge ? What if the guy had a hostage in front of him and you could only see a limited part of him ?
I think some people confuse military combat with civilian self defense. Military handguns are very loose to operate under the worst possible conditions. This isn't the case with us. We are more worried about pocket lint than mud. We should be regularly cleaning our firearms etc. Having a sloppy fitting handgun in the civilian arena is no great asset.
 
Der Grosse, you are the key element of the weapons system . . .

1) Both the H&K USP and the Beretta 92FS are excellent, superior quality 9mm autoloaders.
2) Some pistols are inherently more accurate than others; however, the relevant question is which pistol provides you with greater accuracy. Significantly, you are the key element in the "weapons system" -- the system certainly is not the semiautomatic alone. Therefore, the ergonomics, sight picture, natural pointing, balance, hand feel, trigger pull, and so forth of the two candidates' are critical. These attributes matched with yours lead to accuracy.
3) Once you have a short-list of high quality (reliable, durable, accurate, etc.) candidates -- and you have a fine one -- the key issue becomes which autoloader is best for you, not which is theoretically best for the general population.
 
This is an old post of mine and I have since had my questions answered by an experience I had last month. It confirmed what a lot of you folks said.

I went to the range with a friend. He said he was rusty, but he has lots of shooting experience and lots of guns. I had asked him to bring a few different guns for me to try out.

We ended up with his Glock 17, Glock .45 (don't remember which model number), Beretta 96 and my HK P7M8. We had about 400-500 rounds between us. I shot best with my P7, pretty good with the Beretta and Glock .45, and had accuracy troubles with the Glock 17. However, while my friend was impressed by my P7, he shot almost the same 2-3" group at 10' with every gun he picked up (although by the end of the session he was just making one big ragged hole with the P7).

My conclusions:

1. So long as its a quality manufacturer, accuracy is all about the shooter, not the gun.

2. Personal ergonomic preferrences are key.
 
While you can say that some guns are more accurate than others, the gun that is going to be most accurate for you is the one you use the most. practice, practice, practice. i'd say if you can, go to a range that rents 'em and test them both...figure which is the most comfortable for you, which one just pulls you to that tight grouping each time. that's the most accurate gun for you. my P99 is more accurate than i am right now.



Adept
 
You won't go wrong with either one. I shoot the Beretta 92 a little better simply because I practice with it more.
 
My H&K P7M8, which I used for the first time last night, is clearly my most accurate handgun. There are so many factors, including human ones, that can affect accuracy. It's difficult to nail down just one factor.
 
Both fine guns.

If your gun is target accurate it is combat accurate. If a gun is combat accurate it is not neccesarily target accurate.

Both are some of the best handguns on the market. You should base your choice on a number of factors. Given that both are accurate and reliable consider this.

Which gun fits your hand the best?

Mag capacity? What do you need?

If you plan to carry which is easiest for you to conceal on your body.

How quickly can you acqiure a sight picture w/ either?

Can you easliy work all of the safeties etc. with your fingers?

If you are going to shoot targets are the sights appropriate.

If you want a survival/combat gun you may want to go with what is plentiful in your part of the world. Pretty much counts out the HK.

Which trigger pull do you prefer. Dry fire them a few times while aiming and see if you lose the sight picture when you sqeeze the trigger.

If you want to customize it, what is available. Way leaning to Berreta on this one.

Although I would gladly own both guns. If you want a can't go wrong option buy a CZ75b and spend the substantial savings on ammo and shoot it through the gun. You will easily save a few hundred and that means a few thousand rounds of S&B. You put a few thousand through a CZ and you should come out the other side a pretty formidable fella. good marksmanship training is a must to just blasting ammo won't do it. good luck with your choice. -ddt
 
forgot to mention

You realy should listen to these posts. These folks have given you very sound advice. Especially the Practice part and accuracy being on the shooter when you have a good gun. -ddt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top