In reference to handguns, I frequently see statements like, "...feels really good in my hand...", "...good balance...", etc., implying that if one likes the "feel" it is a "good" thing relative to shootability. To me, that is an oxymoron.
Take for instance the standard (not longer "Artillery" or "Navy"), four-inch Luger. Most would say that the Luger "feels really good", in the hand, but in fact that gun's weight is in the hand and the barrel (and front sight), is free wander about as it will...not exactly a desirable trait for a handgun if you want to actually hit what you are shooting at.
On the other hand, take the various targetmodels of Ruger .22 autos that mimic the grip of the Luger, except that they have untapered, heavy barrels. Compared to the Luger, the balance point is in front of the hand, not in it. Those autos are likely to be described as "...feeling less good...", in the hand than the aforementioned Luger.
Nevertheless, Ruger put bull barrels on those guns for a reason...to be able to be fired as accurately as possible via a steady hold and consequently more steady sight picture.
I wholeheartedly agree that handguns represent several compromises depending upon intended use (i.g., light weight to accommodate having to carry it), but I think a lot of people get the concept of what is "good balance", all wrong. Feel free to post disagreements, but explain why..I may learn something I have not thought of.
Take for instance the standard (not longer "Artillery" or "Navy"), four-inch Luger. Most would say that the Luger "feels really good", in the hand, but in fact that gun's weight is in the hand and the barrel (and front sight), is free wander about as it will...not exactly a desirable trait for a handgun if you want to actually hit what you are shooting at.
On the other hand, take the various targetmodels of Ruger .22 autos that mimic the grip of the Luger, except that they have untapered, heavy barrels. Compared to the Luger, the balance point is in front of the hand, not in it. Those autos are likely to be described as "...feeling less good...", in the hand than the aforementioned Luger.
Nevertheless, Ruger put bull barrels on those guns for a reason...to be able to be fired as accurately as possible via a steady hold and consequently more steady sight picture.
I wholeheartedly agree that handguns represent several compromises depending upon intended use (i.g., light weight to accommodate having to carry it), but I think a lot of people get the concept of what is "good balance", all wrong. Feel free to post disagreements, but explain why..I may learn something I have not thought of.