Should New Pistols Come With TEST TARGET for Accuracy?

Should new pistols come with test targets?

  • Yes

    Votes: 33 37.9%

  • No

    Votes: 49 56.3%

  • Unsure

    Votes: 5 5.7%
  • Total voters
    87
  • Poll closed .
No, it will drive up the production cost which is passed on to the customer.
Click to expand...

It will do that. That because no instead of checking 1 per lot/day/shift, they will be 100% checking and repairing as needed to a spec they create. Anything you check 100% is going to increase repairs. That is good if accuracy matters.

Trouble is, reliability matters. Ammo is too expensive to shoot 200 rnds from each gun, so we deal with returning guns. Would you pay an extra $100 if the gun was machine fired 200 times before you got it?
 
That because no instead of checking 1 per lot/day/shift, they will be 100% checking and repairing as needed to a spec they create.
Click to expand...

Does this mean that factories are not test firing every pistol? I thought they did. Although, I suppose, nowdays, they might not be....

Just stick a target in front of the gun when test fired, thats all they need to do.

Personally, it doesn't matter to me. I've bought hmm...3 new in the box condtion pistols in the last 10 years or so. And only one of them from a dealer at a shop. No pistol I've ever gotten came with a test target, although one did come with a fired case.

Most of my guns didn't come with boxes or paperwork anyway, so including a test target for a gun for me is a moot point.
 
No,Because it would just be something else to complain about.Most handgun shooters are well below average when it comes to accuracy & well below what the firearm will do.We've all been to the range,know what I mean?:rolleyes:
 
I'd say that if all came with that test fire target, a good shooter would find a gun that he shoots 3" with and all day long he'd get to shoot these targets with the same gun (great job!) and then they'd ship these targets with the other guns. My point is how would you really know if it came from the same gun that is in your hand? IMO, you wouldn't.
 
Just because the shooter at the factory can hit the bullseye doesnt mean your going to.
Click to expand...

+1. A well grouped target doesn't mean that a gun will translate into an instant tack driver for the owner.
 
Colt Woodman

I have inherited my parents Colt Woodsman. They purchased it in 1953 at the Seward General Hardware store in Seward, Alaska when they were homesteaders. The signed factory target is still in the box. I don't think the manufacturers should be required to do this; but I think they should do it anyway to prove to themselves and the buyer that the product was ready and worthy to bear the name of the company. I think in 1953, Colt wouldn't let anything leave the factory that would stand up to Smith and Wesson's offerings and vice-versa.
 
If I presented to you two M&P9...same batch both test fired at factory under same conditions (eg same ammo 5 shot group from rest)

M&P #1 shot 4" at 15yds
M&P #2 shot 2" at 15yds

When you open the inspect the gun at LGS and see the test targets which would you pick? Theyre both combat accurate, both meet S&W QC
Click to expand...

That’s actually a very good point. The four inch pistol may sit in the gun dealer’s case a long time.

But…..

Maybe the manufacturer shouldn’t let the four inch pistol leave their factory in the first place. If a quality pistol such as an M&P9 can’t shoot two inch groups at a messily 15 yards, it shouldn’t be offered for sale to the public.

Or…..

Price them differently. The two inch pistol would sell for, let’s say, $600. A three inch pistol would sell for $550. A four inch pistol sells for $500.

Just a thought.
 
Pointless. There a load of guns that are hard to shoot well that when you clamp em in a vise are incredible of great accuracy. IMO, it would be a benefit to the manufacture if they did for when all the lame a$$ shooters out there call them and say how bad their gun shoots they can respond with "look in the mirror" for the real issue.

Just about every handgun made is more accurate than most of the shooters out there (even mouse guns with no sights) and to tell the truth most shooters could care less and never shoot beyond 30 feet anyway.

LK
 
If the pistol is only able to achieve "combat accuracy" at rest how much worse is it when we use it offhand in stress!
Click to expand...
Stress doesn't affect the pistol, so the degradation in accuracy due to stress has nothing to do with the accuracy of the pistol. The accuracy errors of the pistol and the accuracy errors of the shooter combine in a less than intuitive way to create an overall expected accuracy of the entire shooter/gun system. What it all boils down to is that, generally speaking, the shooter is the biggest source of error in the equation, regardless of whether stress is involved or not. Moreso when stress is involved.
Does this mean that factories are not test firing every pistol? I thought they did.
Click to expand...
The better ones do, although testfiring (based on some videos I've seen) may amount to nothing more than a function check. i.e. Shooting a magazine, or most of a magazine, without aiming just to make sure the gun operates properly.
If I presented to you two M&P9...same batch both test fired at factory under same conditions (eg same ammo 5 shot group from rest)

M&P #1 shot 4" at 15yds
M&P #2 shot 2" at 15yds

When you open the inspect the gun at LGS and see the test targets which would you pick?
Click to expand...
The problem is that without knowing precisely what ammo was used, the information is useless. The #1 gun might turn out to be FAR more accurate with the ammunition you actually choose to use in the gun than gun #2 even though it shot better with the factory's test ammunition.

The main thing that test targets do is generate heartburn for the factory in the form of:

1. Irate buyers calling because they can't duplicate the results on the target and who think they've been cheated.
2. Confused buyers calling because they can't duplicate the results on the target and who want to know how the results were achieved.
 
At one time, Colt, S&W and High Standard all shot their guns for accuracy and included test targets. They fired at least one full cylinder or magazine in addition to a proof load for each chamber. Later, Ruger did the same.

Today, I understand Colt fires only 1 proof load in its autos, 2-3 in the revolvers. S&W does the same thing, and probably Ruger has the same practice. The factory rep for a 1911 clone maker told me they fired one Cor Bon as a proof load, but of course it is not, being well within SAAMI pressure specs. The test/proof loads also show up any gross inaccuracy. If you want more test firing you will pay for it.

Perhaps, there is a an idea there, like the old Winchester 1 of 1000. If you want a pistol that has been test fired, and the target enclosed, the price will be an extra $50. Any takers?

As to accuracy, yes, handguns are made that will put all their shots in one hole at 50 feet. And they do come with a target. But why would anyone wanting a defense gun pay big money for a gun that would be totally impractical for that purpose. I admit that the idea of a free pistol in an IWB holster is interesting, but not very practical. Besides, if I need a defense gun at six feet I am not going to worry that it won't put every round in the bad guy's shirt button at 50 m.

Jim
 
I don't think it's necessary unless the manufacturer is specifically marketing the gun as a target piece. If the gun is being sold on it's ability to punch a bunch of holes in paper really close together, than prove to me that it can.

Other than that, I'm not really that worried. Pretty much every manufacturer has figured out a way to make guns that will be accurate enough to hit man sized targets out to 50 yards. They may not make super small groups at that distance, but there aren't a whole lot of shooters capable of doing that in the first place. As long as the gun is shooting where the sights are pointing, and my targets don't look like long range buckshot patternsIi'm happy.
 
My apologies.....

It now seems that this thread is more specifically about defensive handguns. 22 handguns designed for shooting small game animals have to be more accurate.
 
I don't think including a test target with every gun is necessary, or even a good idea. It would be like demanding that automakers include a dyno chart with every new car.

The problem is, if a car is advertised as having 250 horsepower, a particular specimen that "only" makes 248 horsepower on the factory dyno is going to sit on the lot forever, or you're going to have owners bringing their car back in for warranty service because they couldn't duplicate the dyno sheet. Of course, the fact that the customer is using a different brand of dyno than the factory, or doing the test at a different temperature, or at a different altitude, or with different gas won't be enough to placate him (and I can almost guarantee it will be a 'him'.)

Providing test targets, even with a gun that's not advertised as a precision target model, is going to whip the "measurebators" into a frenzy as they pore over a store's entire inventory, trying to find the one gun that "outshoots" the others by 1/32".
 
I think it depends on the gun. I would expect (and like) a test target for something like my Colt Gold Cup or even a SW1911 sku#108284, but not for my SW J-frame or AO WWII Repro.
 
I don't see anything wrong with putting a target in front of the pistol if the manufacturer is going to test fire it anyway. I don't see any picky Walther, H&K, CZ, etc., owners causing trouble at local gunshops looking in the boxes for the P99, or P30, or 75b with the tightest group.

I think it is better for the consumer, especially in the extreme cases like if a pistol really does shoot 10" groups at 15 yards. I don't think it has to be mandatory, but I believe manufacturers SHOULD do it. With the amount of sheets of paper that already come with a new gun, I doubt a test target would add cost, unless the manufacturer wouldn't have checked for accuracy in the first place, and in that case, a lack of a test target would indicate this.
 
Its not that I want a duty pistol to perform as a target pistol. A test target of only 5 rds will show a lot about the guns assembly...simple things such as sight alignment and parts fit. Also, just because I cannot outshoot a pistol does not
mean I should be content with a mediocre product.


Guys im not splitting hairs here. M&P have been erratic with many cases 7inches or more of deviation shot from REST. Ammo alone cannot be the cause and it has been identified as a problem of barrel lockup. Not bashin MP but just stating that a gun as proven as it can still have issues that can be observed with a simple multi round test fire
 
Guns are so expensive now and the profit margin on them is so low,believe it or not,it's just one more thing you'll have to pay extra for.

And for all that quality control idea,one round-and that's all they'll shoot-won't prove anything anyway.
 
True about the cost but several companies are already supplying test targets and yet remain competitive price wise. Most folks would not fuss about a $20 difference if it's the platform that they want.

What do people basically want in a pistol?
1) it shoots straight
2) it's reliable

Test target will be good enough for #1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top