Instructor said this

If the "instructor" made such wide generalities about his preferences, I'd be suspicious of anything else he might have said.
 
Charlesc said:
As for CZ I asked him about CZ 75 BD full size gun. He recommends Smith and Wesson MP 9mm over it.
Click to expand...
Find a new instructor. This guy is obviously a Smith & Wesson fanboy. S&W makes (or made) excellent firearms, but so does Ruger. And the CZ-75 is arguably THE most widely adopted handgun in the world, and IMHO anyone who would suggest to someone who is considering a CZ-75 that the M&P is "better" really needs to perform a reality check.
 
Charles,
Your instructor gave preferences, apparently without passing on much of a foundation.

There is nothing wrong with those CZ pistols that are based on the CZ75.
There have been problems reported with one or two of the newer polymer CZ pistols.

I've worked with two CZ 75 compacts, ended up buying the last one despite my resolve to buy no more guns.

Recommending a Smith M&P9 over a full-sized CZ 75D is comparing apples to oranges.

Two different trigger mechanisms, two different sizes, two different weights, two different safety mechanisms.
The Smith would be lighter, more compact, and its trigger would be easier for you to learn. It's a simpler pistol, and that may be the reason behind his recommendation.

Define your own anticipated uses.
If strictly a range toy, get whichever you like.
If concealed carry, the Smith has a size advantage.

The instructor's admonition against CZ pistols could be because they have a long double-action trigger pull, and a more complicated (slightly) operation that involves dropping the hammer after firing. The Smith doesn't have that.

As far as Smith & Wesson revolvers over Rugers goes, that never fails to open up a metric ton of arguments.

I'll state my own opinions, based on having carried both brands in uniform, working professionally with several samples of each over the past few years, currently owning several of both, and discussing both brands with custom gunsmiths:

The Smith is more refined.
The Smith is not what it used to be.
The Ruger is a more modern design, not based on updates of the Smith's century-old basic mechanism.
The Ruger was designed from the ground up to handle both higher pressures and a higher volume of sustained use.
The Smith will tend to go out of time before the Ruger will (comparing DAs here).
Both companies have suffered from quality control issues recently.
Both companies have turned out overly-torqued barrels leaving canted sights.
The Smith has had internal dimension changes over the past few years that leave it (full-sized models, not the Js) with a stiffer DA trigger and one less tunable.
Both brands use MIM parts.
The Ruger is a more durable gun.

I am aware opposing opinions will follow, but at least I've given you the reasons behind mine.

If you don't plan to shoot 40,000 rounds of hot loads through a revolver, the choice will make no difference to you. Pick the one you think you like, and then get a set of grips that'll fit your hand if what comes on it doesn't.
Understand that the outa-box feel is not final, you can find numerous aftermarket grips to change how the gun feels in your hand for both brands.

The Springfield XDs are a decent pistol, but not superior to a good Glock in my opinion, and they do need to be cleaned.
I've carried Glocks in uniform & I've owned two Springfields.
I am not a Glock fanboy, but I still own five, and I sold the Springfields.

In your situation, I'd pass on an auto till you've got a more solid foundation behind you.
I'd suggest strongly that you learn the basics with a simpler revolver.
Failing that, the Glock, Smith, and Springfield will all be easier to learn than the CZ, because they're simpler to operate & have shorter & lighter trigger pulls.

It's good that you took a class, but when an instructor makes recommendations for or against, ask him why next time.
Denis
 
charlesc,

Don't take the instructor's comments to mean all that much.

Now I LIKE S&W revolvers, especially older ones, but I sure don't say for self-defense they are to be picked over a Ruger.

And I don't know what his problem is with CZs.

One thing I learned years ago with teaching CHL, one keeps their personal opinions out of the class.

Deaf
 
Deaf Smith said: One thing I learned years ago with teaching CHL, one keeps their personal opinions out of the class.

charlesc, you need to take your training from Deaf.
 
I know a bunch of instructors, and most of the time when I ask them what guns they prefer they say something like, "Whatever works."
 
What I'm hearing is that you may be a ruger fan. The smiths are nice guns, as are rugers. The one thing that ruger is known for is tough, beefy revolvers.
 
I'm an Instructor and I will say that most instructors that I have come across think they know more than they actually do, and are real fast talkers who use big words just to impress you. They also like to strut a lot.
Take a couple of courses and low and behold, you are a real instructor.
CZs are great guns at a reasonable price.
I have a wall full of Rugers that I love. All of them are Single Action.
I have several top end Smith and Wessons that I wouldn't trade for anything.
I have a several top end competition 1911s, and a bunch of Sigs. {You can't go wrong buying any Sig except their .22 mosquito which is junk}

Just do the homework yourself, talk to good gun guys and listen to them.
Stay away from "instructors" opinions unless they come with a good pedigree from other shooters.

PS-- This is one fine forum to find good and honest answers from.

Eric
 
One of my instructors spent several minutes touting the Springfield XDS as the ultimate carry gun. He was also an employee of the gun store/range where the training was held, that just happened to be selling those guns. He managed to secure a few sales during the course of the class.
 
We all have opinions, reasonable or not. We have our likes and dislikes.

The problem is not that the instructor likes brand X and you like brand Y, the problem gets cloudy if you end up in court.

If one is involved in a shooting everything comes out. Chances are, one lawyer or the other is going to drag your instructor into the court room. At least he will have his POI.

Everything is going to come out, to cloud the jury, to toss doubt. For example "you're instructor said not to use brand Y, why did you go against your training?"

Silly I know, but think about it, how hard is it to confuse someone on the jury that doesn't know anything about guns.

There are two types of guns out there, there are safe guns and guns that are not safe. That's all the instructor should say, then add, "the one you can shoot the best and fits your needs".

If the instructor teaches Brand X is good, never use Brand Y, flee from him as if he was a publican.

To the instructor, if a student can't shoot brand Y or it isn't working for him for what ever reason, have him try brand X and let him see himself, don't make rash comments based on your likes and dislikes.

A good example: Among other things I put on High Power Rifle clinics. Someone always shows up with a rifle that just wont work in HP, (ruled notwithstanding). I let him shoot his rifle, then I have him shoot one of my HP rifles. After that, I normally don't have to make any comments. He answered his own question of what works and what doesn't.

Works the same way in SD classes. I normally take a wheel barrel full of pistols and revolvers to my SD class, and encourage students to try as many as possible.

But I'll never say don't use brand Y, only brand X is acceptable.

But, then this is just my opinion, based on my prejudges.
 
Personally, I think an ethical instructor should make it clear when he is expounding upon his own personal preferences as opposed to stating that a given make or model of handgun is known to be unsafe, unreliable, or otherwise unsuitable for use. The handguns named in the OP are none of those.
 
I have been a firearms instructor for going on 30 years and I never found it a good idea to just start making brand recommendations during a class. Now if someone asked what do you (the instructor) own/shoot and why, that is different. For example an instructor was asked about Glocks and he responded they are solid, reliable pistols that have a lot of accessories available for them. When asked if that was what he owned, he said no as he liked to shoot both lead and jacketed bullets and Glock states not to shoot lead out of their pistols so he owned a XD which is fine with lead bullets as well as jacketed. That was response to a question but not telling someone what they should shoot. I would be curious to know how long that instructor has been conducting classes as that seems like someone without a lot of teaching experience.
 
saleen322 - so the Glocks does not recommend that you shoot lead and jacketed hollow point bullets out of Glocks?
 
Now if someone asked what do you (the instructor) own/shoot and why, that is different
Click to expand...

My answer to that is it doesn't matter what I like or shoot, what fits me may or may not fit you.

My wife helps in my Woman's only classes. To point this out, I carry a 642 in my pocket, my skinny wife couldn't get a 38 round in her tight jeans.
 
Whoops, I missed the part when he said jacketed hollowpoint. Yeah, JHPs are fine, just not un-jacketed lead. Ha, maybe I should actually read what I quote, huh?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top