Thursday, January 25, 2018

Accuracy of Small 9 mm Pistols

       I decided to compare the accuracy of some of the small, single-stack 9 mm pistols out there intended for concealed carry. Obviously, I can't test them all because I don't own or have access to all these weapons. Instead, I decided to look for online sources where the weapons had been tested. Moreover, I decided to stick to results published in NRA publications (The American Rifleman and Shooting Illustrated). I had a couple reasons for doing so: first, although the distances varied, the authors all shot the weapons from some sort of rest, and used five (5) 5-round groups; and, second, being NRA publications, I figured that the authors would give the handguns the benefit of the doubt, so if there was any bias it would be in favor of greater accuracy.

        The firearms I found and decided to use for my comparison were:
  1.  The Glock 43;
  2.  Remington's Gen 2 R51;
  3.  The M&P Shield;
  4.  The Taurus Millennium G2;
  5.  The Beretta Nano
  6.  Springfield XD-E, and:
  7.  Ruger LC9s Pro.
According to the articles, the firearms performed as follows (I will be using the average group size, and, where necessary, calculating the average for 7 yards for comparison purposes):

  • Glock 43: 1.96 inches at 7 yards.
  • R51: 1.16 inches at 7 yards.
  • M&P Shield: 4.09 inches at 25 yards (or 1.15 inches at 7 yards).
  • Taurus PT111: 5.18 inches at 15 yards (or 2.42 inches at 7 yards).
  • Beretta Nano: 0.81 inches at 7 yards.
  • Springfield XD-E: 1.13 inches at 7 yards.
  • Ruger LC9s Pro: 2.72 inches at 5 yards (or 3.81 inches at 7 yards).
Accuracy is not the sole criteria in selecting a defensive pistol, and not even the most significant factor. But it is something to consider since, under stress, your accuracy is going to be worse than normal and you don't need the additional handicap of a weapon that has inherently poor mechanical accuracy.

No comments:

Post a Comment

A New Defensive Pistolcraft Post ...

  ... from Jon Low . There is a lot of good stuff in this post, and Jon seems (at least to me) to have included much more of his own comment...