S&W 99 nine milimeter accuracy w/115grain?

G

gregy

Inactive
Hi Everyone,
I am relatively new to this forum and have really found it an informative place. I am also relatively new to the handgun shooting sports world. I did some research into semiautos and fell in love with the Walther P99 9mm. I recently saved the money to purchase one but found it to be a very "rare" bird in my neck of the woods. I inquired with four gun dealers in the SW Michigan area and found none that stocked the P99. I heard all of the stories familiar here as to the demise of Walther in the USA and Smith&Wesson producing the "new" 99. Yes,
I now know that I can get a genuine P99 from Earls . But it is too late. I broke down and purchased the Smith version as it was readily available and I did like the ergonomics of the rounded trigger guard.
Ok, my question is: After putting about 450 rounds of ammo through it (115grain jhp,fmj and handloaded wadcutters)I have found the gun to shoot somewhat "low". Otherwise I have not been disappointed with this weapon. It has not given me any other problems. I thought that it was me and not the gun but after reading on this forum that others have had this same issue (with 115grain rounds) I got concerned. I called Smith&Wesson customer service. They were nice but told me that the problem centered around the "high velocity" characteristics of the 115 grain bullet and not the gun. A heavier bullet weight say 124 or 147 grains is a "slower" velocity bullet as it "leaves" the barrel of the gun. I was told that when shooting the heavier round it gives the gun more time to "rise up" during the recoil phase therefore placing my shot "higher" on the target.
I was ok with this explaination at first but now question the validity. Sure, the 115grain cartridge is a light cartridge but why should it shoot consistently lower than the point of aim?
Besides, the 115grain weight is a very popular cartridge around these parts to find. Smith reccomended that I try the Federal Hydra-Shock 135 grain JHPs. I will, but I will likely find the high cost of this round to be inhibitive to practice with ($15.00/20ct).
What do you folks think about this? I would really value your opinions. One poster, I think on this board, actually said that he was told to send his gun back to S&W. I asked the customer service folks about this and they said that no such "recall" is currently going on. I took that to mean that there are no "problems" with this gun and accuracy. I wonder if the Walther suffers from this problem as the design is very similar. I also suspect that this issue may involve the design of the barrel. Is Smith doing something different with the barrel over Walther? I do believe that the Smith is stainless steel where the Walther I do not know outside of that??
Thanks for any input that you can provide.
I am aware of the political issues with Smith BTW.
I do care, but did not think that I had the choice of obtaining a Walther P99 at the time.
Also, lastly, I understand that this issue is not present on the 40cal. version of the SW99.
Thanks.
Greg
 
I don't know about the S&W model, but the Walther comes with three additional front sights to adjust for elevation. If the S&W didn't come with it, perhaps you can get some spares from Earl's and still be able to switch them out.
 
Yes, Thairlar, my S&W99 did come with the four interchangable front sights of varying heights.
Even with the shortest one the gun it still seems to shoot about three inches lower than point of aim at seven yards distance.
I am concerned because I noticed this effect before I read about the problem here in the Firing Line forum and wondered just what "I" was doing wrong. I tried the lowest front sight and I still noticed the gun doing the same thing. I will admit that I HAVE NOT tried to shoot anything other than the 115 grain cartridge with this gun.
The choice of four varying front sight heights right out of the box is nice I might add.
Thanks for your reply and shoot straight and safe.
 
gregy, are you shooting from a bench rest or freehand?

450 rounds is not a great deal to base moving sights around on, especially as - by your own admission - you are new to shooting.

Let some other folks try shooting it as well, preferably some folks who have shot for a bit with different handguns.
 
Greg, I'm a newbie, and also own a P99, but where I'm concerned the explanation about bullet weight sounds like a bunch of crapola, if you ask me. My bull-$hit-o-meter just went on red alert.

If you're evaluating the gun shooting by hand, chances are pretty good that you're not siting the gun... the gun is siting you. We newbies have LOTS of bad habits on marksmanship that we don't even realize.

Have you tried siting in the gun with a rest? Send the target out to 20 yards (give or take) and carefully fire 5 shots. They should all be in a fairly tight group. If not, then that would suggest even more strongly to me that my technique was off. Evaluate, adjust if necessary, shoot another 5... and so on. I just did this with my P99 after changing over to Trijicons.

Give that a try, and see if anything changes.

Good luck!
 
I'm pretty new too, so I know all about the bad habits. Sometimes I go shooting and I feel like flagellation is order afterwards. ;) Have you tried loading snap caps into a magazine to see if you're anticipating the recoil? Throw one or two into a magazine at random in between the live rounds, or have someone else do it for you so you really don't know where they are. When you pull the trigger and it goes click, if your wrists are breaking down you're anticipating. I cured myself of that habit, well mostly cured, with some dry firing and by putting more lead down range.
 
Gregy,

I also have an SW99, and I also experience the same problem. It may well have been my post you read. S&W told me to send it back to them when I called asking for a lower front sight to bring the 115gr loads (I've tried several brands) up to point of aim. I haven't done it yet (procrastination).

I think S&W's explanation makes sense - a lighter, faster bullet could shoot lower for the reason given. BUT, that doesn't make it okay that a new, modern 9mm pistol with four interchangeable front sights can't be adjusted to shoot to point of aim with what is probably the most popular 9mm bullet weight on the market. I have a friend with a Walther P99 (the real deal, so to speak), and he has the same problem (he just loads heavier bullets for it). I'm not sure why the P99/SW99 design seems to have this problem, but I still plan to send mine back to S&W to see what they can do. Assuming that you've shot from a rest, and maybe had an experienced shooter try it as well, and the problem persists, I'd call S&W back and ask for a shorter front sight or some other solution.

Just for the record, I have three other 9mm pistols and none of them have this problem with the 115gr loads. I can't help but think this is a design/production flaw. I mean, several inches low at 7 yards with the lowest front sight? Think how far off you'd be at 25 yards or farther! What kind of ammo is that tallest front sight made for? I doubt that ANY ammo would shoot to point of aim using it (maybe custom 250 grain loads at 300fps). :)

Doug
 
Doug: I'm both a newbie, and a born cynic, so perhaps you can help me out. I'm not buying into S&W's explanation, becuase it only accounts for the effects of the recoil stage. Greg said that Smith's explanation for the lower shots on lighter bullets was: "shooting the heavier round... gives the gun more time to "rise up" during the recoil phase therefore placing my shot "higher" on the target. Ok, so if it's the RECOIL stage that occurs AFTER the bullet is well on its way to the target, how can any barrel rise affect a bullet that's already half way through the paper? It also doesn't add up if you're using a rest, where muzzle motion downward due to a lighter bullet, just isn't going to happen. For these two key reasons, I tend to dismiss S&W's explanation. Maybe I'm not getting something here, but this explanation just doesn't sound right.

Greg: I think there's a simpler explanation. I think it's a combination of two key user factors that amount to simply getting used to the gun. The first is that, like me, you're a newbie, and we probably have a great many bad habits, until we gain more experience. Snap caps are a beautiful thing. The second thing I think might be going on here is how you're sighting. Use the DOTS, not the BLADES. For some reason, the P99 has VERY high blades, above the dots, and that was causing me to shoot low, since most of us are used sighting with the traditional 'line up the flats' method. Try using the DOTS and look through the GAPS in the sight to get your sight picture, and see what happens. Also, since the dots that S&W/Walther use aren't terribly bright or contrasty, you might want to consider replacing them with Trijicons, which I found have made a big difference. Particularly with a gun that will be my HD weapon. :D
 
Rovert,

I can't personally verify that S&W's explanation is correct, but, I have heard/read of this effect from other sources as well. Obviously barrel movement after the bullet leaves the barrel has no impact, but I believe recoil begins while the bullet is traveling down the barrel. If so, faster bullet = less time in barrel = less barrel rise while bullet is in barrel = lower shot. I won't argue much for this theory - I can only say that I've heard it from various sources and it sounds reasonable to me.

Regarding your comment that shooting from a rest will eliminate "muzzle movement downward from using a lighter bullet" - I don't think anyone is claiming that there is ANY downward movement of the barrel - only upward movement - which occurs with or without a rest.

As for this being a sighting problem and/or inexperience - well maybe, but I bought my first handgun about 25 years ago and have been shooting regularly for a long time. I haven't experienced this problem with my other handguns. I use the same sight picture with my P99 as I do with my other handguns - I don't focus on the dots.

I think your comments are reasonable - and I might say the same thing if I hadn't experienced this problem myself. And if I didn't have a friend (an experienced competitive shooter) with a P99 that does the same thing. But, given my experience, I think this is more likely to be a P99/SW99 problem rather than user error.

Doug
 
Doug, funny you point out the physics of this. I was just having this very discussion on the phone tonight with another TFL'er that lives in my area, and you're probably right... that recoil begins at the moment of ignition and movement. Now that it's been pointed out, it would make sense that there is some backward inertia counter to the travel of the bullet from the moment it begins its journey.

I'm still stumped, and curious as hell, though. I might put some of my 147gr Ranger SXTs through a target using a rest, and then switch off to 115gr PMC or Magtech to see what happens.

FWIW, I find the P99 shoots to point of aim for me, but then again, I won't rule out that the gun has sighted me, rather than me sighting the gun. :D
 
Lighter bullets if at higher velocity will usually hit lower than heavier bullets due to differential in muzzel rise. At close ranges. From bout 50yards out it goes the other way, for different reason.

Sam
 
I used to have a slow motion video of a handgun being fired and it was surprising to me that the the bullet had left the gun before the pistol reacted. I wish I could find it on the net. It just made it look like an insanely long time between the ignition and the reaction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top