Mainah said:
I inherited a kit-built .45 flintlock pistol years ago and I've been using it for dry fire practice randomly during the day in my home office. I've never actually fired it, and it's a safe and quick choice because I don't have any blackpowder loading components.
Obviously it doesn't prep me completely for a modern gun. However I feel like holding all that extra weight while working on trigger pull and sight alignment has helped. But I could be wrong, thoughts?
"Muscle memory"
The utility of dry firing, in my opinion and in my experience, is to train your muscles to properly align the sights and manipulate the trigger. If you dry fire with some firearm so radically different in size, shape, and weight from your actual self-defense pistol, I respectfully submit that you are training yourself to miss with the "real" gun.
History: The original M1911 had a "straight" mainspring housing running up the back of the frame. Feedback from soldiers (who were, at that time, accustomed to revolvers) was that it didn't point "right." They were generally hitting lower than where they thought they were aiming. So, when the M1911A1 modifications came along in the late 1920s, one of the changes was the arched mainspring housing. Its purpose was to better replicate the natural point of aim for soldiers transitioning from revolvers.
Personally, I prefer the straight MSH and I swap out any arched MSHs that come into my possession. I know of other people who do the opposite.
I have a friend, also a 1911 shooter, who used to keep an airsoft 1911 in his garage workshop. Any time he walked past the bench where the pistol resides, he would grab it and take a snap shot at some target in the shop. His goal was to improve his target acquisition and muscle memory.
I just don't see how dry firing an 18th century dueling pistol could be of any help in training to use a Glock, 1911, Sig, or whatever.