USA 1 SHOT Pistol Brace

[35remington]

Where do you plan to hang the stock on your person when the pistol is riding in a holster?

The Luddite in me cannot help but think with stock attached to a Glock or most other plastikpistoles you now have a low powered rifle that can’t do better than 8-10 MOA at best. Once the stock is attached the limitations of the pistol end of the assembly become more apparent as service pistols of this type are not exactly tackdrivers.

Please excuse the commentary as I am sure that if you are having fun you no doubt are.

[jcren]

All a matter of use and opinion. I would love one. Since we have hogs I like to walk the land regularly just to see what's doing and maybe bump into some pigs. I always carry a pistol for snakes, close encounters and the occasional trespasser AND usually carry a rifle in case I see hogs or yotes across a field or from a hilltop. To be able to strap on a 1911 and swing that on a cross-body tac sling would kill 2 birds with much less weight and keep my hands free.

[mcdaniel.mac]

I guess my one question would be why use a brace on it instead of a stock. It's not permanently attached to the weapon, actually never attached at all, so why bother with a $100 brace instead of a $40 stock?

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

[dverna]

Randy,
I for one appreciate the write up

I have settled on Glocks for defensive pistols. I have been looking at the new Ruger carbine so I can have magazine interchangeability. This option is interesting but I doubt it will match the accuracy of a rifle....yet it may be good enough.

I think 35 Rem is right about the accuracy we can expect. At least with the Glocks I own.

[Ickisrulz]

I guess my one question would be why use a brace on it instead of a stock. It's not permanently attached to the weapon, actually never attached at all, so why bother with a $100 brace instead of a $40 stock?

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

This is my question also.

[marlin39a]

I just don't see any use for it. Maybe a high priced toy for use at the range. No thanks.

[mcdaniel.mac]

I just don't see any use for it. Maybe a high priced toy for use at the range. No thanks.

Yeah, if they offered one that would fit a Blackhawk or similar I think it would be a great addition to any handgun hunter's kit.

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

[tomj44]

This one is a better price. https://suarezinternational.com/pers...it-for-glocks/

[W.R.Buchanan]

OK I'll start at the bottom and work up.

Tom44. That device attaches to the pistol so it is NFA end of story. The 1 Shot does not attach to the gun in any way. The gun sits up against it and is only held in place by your grip. Release grip and device falls away. It is not NFA! Big difference, also that thing on Suarez's Site is a ***, I've seen them in person.

Mc Daniel: They had some that fit Blackhawks in the initial design phase. Problems were Recoil of the big calibers was transmitted directly to shooter and effectively you had a 4 lb .44 magnum carbine. Also there is no beavertail on a Revolver so the recoil caused the gun to rotate up out of the brace every shot, so it didn't work very well.

Marlin 39A Obviously this device is NOT for everyone. Never said it was. If you had a use for it you would probably want one. I have a use, and it is called "3 gun shoots", where this thing will show it's worth the very first time out.

Don: The accuracy of the 1Shot is not any better than the mechanical accuracy of any pistol, however it is definitely better that you can hold that pistol without help. It does make first shot accuracy exponentially better at all distances but where it is really showing it's worth is on shots from 25+ to 50 or even 75 yards. After I get this thing totally sighted in (thinking 75 yards is best) I will be able to make first round hits out to 100 yards. (on a man sized target)

I was making hits on relatively small Silhouette targets out to 100 Meters with boring regularity. With just a bare G35 I would be lucky to hit a pig target 1 for 5. After correcting for elevation I was 3 for 3 in 5 seconds. at 100 meters offhand. Chickens at 50 Meters are easy hits. Keep in mind, my gun has a Burris Fast-Fire on it, but it has never been of much use since I couldn't hold the gun still enough to refine a sight picture. It was more or less a point and shoot type of thing where as long as I covered the target I would get a hit. With the 1 shot I can hit you everytime in the head at 25 yards from the ready.

Everybody knows that a Glock is not a Target Pistol, however they make this thing for 1911's as well and if you have a 1" at 50 yard 1911,(yes they are out there!) you will have a 1" at 50 yard gun off your shoulder (off a rest) as well. The point of the device is not to increase the accuracy of the gun, it is to increase YOUR accuracy with the gun. Also this device is not going to make your Glock as good as the Ruger Carbine (which I seriously want) But you can't holster a Ruger Carbine either so there is a trade off, which is true of most things.

35 Rem: I want discussion and commentary is OK as well... The sling arrangement they show on the site is just a simple loop that goes over your head and shoulder and the brace hangs next to your side under your arm. I should have one this week to play with will, post pics .

Also I am shooting Short Range Silhouette with this thing Saturday so we'll see what I can do with it at 50-200 Meters. Hopefully the wind won't be blowing 40 mph like it was the other day.

When I get a chance to really put my Glock on paper with the Brace I will get a better Idea of the Mechanical Accuracy of the gun. The Red Dot is 3 MOA so it won't be any better than that, and probably more like 6" at 50 yards which would be more than accurate enough for the intended use of the brace. Being able to pull off a head shot at 25 yards with a Hostage is not something the average LEO is going to feel real confident about. I have only shot about 40 rounds thru my gun with this thing and I would do it in a second. It is that easy to pick up and get comfortable with.

Please note: I can actually shoot my Glock fairly well in the first place and my trigger control is good with the gun so with the brace and the Red Dot it is more about sight picture without having to stabilize the gun as much for the sight picture to be there.

It was received well at my Gun Club meeting last night, where I showed it to some people I figured would be interested. Similar reactions to what we are seeing here, except I had the Laser Pistol there and any one who shot it was sold immediately. Even my Metal Shop Teacher from High School, who is 85, liked it..

Randy

[dverna]

Keep the updates coming Randy.

I agree that a 75 yard zero is a good place to be with something like this. Should yield a point blank range of about 100 yards. Not too shabby IMHO.

[35remington]

Honestly, a 1 inch at fifty yards 1911 is a gun nobody has. As in nobody can prove it, but rather just talks about it. Show me five, five shot groups at 50 fired by a 1911 on the same piece of paper to prove it exists and I will buy the claims. Nobody steps up to that plate for a reason. No 1911 maker or builder has a one inch at fifty accuracy guarantee, also for a reason.

I can see an accurate revolver or an accurized 1911 as being a better choice for a separate stock arrangement than a plastikpistole and would have a hard time understanding why someone would choose a stock Glock for such use over a more accurate pistol.

But then if a target really needs hitting I have to identify it, pull the pistol out of the holster, attach the stock, and squeeze off the shot. In contrast my tiny 25-20 Contender carbine with small 4X scope is merely raised and shot after the target is identified and the overall bulk is little different than a pistol on the belt in a holster along with a separately slung buttstock for the pistol.

To me having a pistol on your belt and a slung buttstock on the same or opposite shoulder is zero gain over sensible alternatives and has some downsides as compared to my very small Contender Carbine slung over one shoulder. Those alternatives and downsides dentified in the paragraph above and below.

Besides being faster into action and presenting little difference in carryability, the accuracy runs between 0.25-0.35 inch at fifty yards with the 75 VMax in the Contender Carbine. No revolver or auto loader can come close to that. Yes, I will show multiple groups if somebody asks. The OTT barrel did come dear, but that is the cost of less compromise and more certainty.

If something needs to be shot I like to put my best foot forward. But the shooting event does not have to be the same level of certainty for everyone.

In giving my reasons for not using an assembly that I clearly regard as a step backwards I certainly cannot invalidate other people’s reasons for wanting to use one. Their reasoning works for them because they say it does and who am I to say they are mistaken if they are happy?

[W.R.Buchanan]

35 Rem: This device is mostly intended for cops and operators (Secret Service, FBI, DHS)who can't carry a rifle full time but could benefit from the extra Accuracy it provides. It may be a little slower to get on target the first time out of the holster, but after that the benefits come directly to the front.

Short maneuverable weapon, that provides improved accuracy over a bare pistol, that can be concealed beneath a suit coat or outer garment, that gives you just enough edge to be worth it if you ever need it.

As far as mounting the device, a little practice goes along way to speeding up the process. I have been playing with it for only a few days and I can get it out and in action in less than 5 seconds, and I know I can get that down to 2-3 seconds with some more practice. And if the gun is already mounted it is just as fast as coming up from the ready with the rifle.

Sure I can get my Carbines in action faster if it is slung Cross Body. If the carbine is hanging on my back the 1Shot is faster.

Believe me when I say "all you have to do is shoot it once and you'll see the benefit." And like I said it was more designed with "Tactical Use" in mind than "Field Use." It will work for both.

As far as the 1" 1911's go,,, I used to work with a guy named Mike Tibbet back in the mid 70's. He was the guy who invented the original Compensated 1911 where the slide indexed on a cone shaped bushing behind the comp on the barrel so it indexed exactly the same way everytime. I have the tool he used to cut the taper in the slide in my tool box.

He had a target on his tool box that he had shot with a gun he built in 38 Super, that had 10 shots in a 1.5" dia. bulls eye! He had shot it OFFHAND and when he told me that I immediately called BS!

He invited me to their next Bowling Pin Shoot where he shot that gun 10 shots (full magazine) into the same 1.5" bull at 50 yards twice in a row, just to show it wasn't a fluke.

I STFU.

All the Bianchi Cup guns will shoot that well because they have to, to be competitive, and any decent Target 1911 will shoot <1" at 25 yards and this has been the prevailing accuracy standard for 1911's for 50+ years.

Randy

[35remington]

I did say I will believe the one inch at fifty 1911 claims when they are seen more than talked about. So far the reverse is true by a margin so enormous it isn’t even measurable. Nobody I know that is credible including our nationally famous Cylinder and Slide here in Fremont regards a “one inch at fifty” guaranteed” 1911 as anything but a figure people who do not regularly work on 1911’s throw around but cannot statistically prove to anyone’s satisfaction.

My ‘splainin on the buttstock topic has mostly to do with addressing the wonderment here that people aren’t stampeding to get in line to buy the gizmos. The basic idea is older than some hills and I doubt the wheel has been reinvented sufficiently to get the gun buying public to regard it as a solution to any problems they cannot solve another way.

I haven’t seen it on industry’s Top Ten lists. So I’ll say harrumph until I’m persuaded otherwise.

Whether someone else regards it as perfect for them is really none of my business and neither they nor I care if anyone is persuaded one way or another. We like what we like and that’s good enough.

[W.R.Buchanan]

35 Rem: this is the latest incarnation of the Broom Handle Mauser with 120 years of new technology included. First ones were 3D printed.

Article in new AR about Mauser Pistols just came today.

I'm shooting short range silhouette tomorrow with it. We'll see how I do.

Randy

[LUBEDUDE]

Many years ago Les Baer used to advertise 1” group guaranteed at 50 yards. He then quietly slid into a 2” guarantee. Now his current ads promise a 3” guarantee.

It makes me wonder if proving it was cause of the wider groups or that demand has grown so much that they just can’t take the time anymore? Or both?

[Tracy]

I guess my one question would be why use a brace on it instead of a stock. It's not permanently attached to the weapon, actually never attached at all, so why bother with a $100 brace instead of a $40 stock?

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

One word: legality.
If it were legal (sans NFA registration) to have a buttstock with a pocket that accepts the grip of a pistol, that is exactly what they would be selling instead of a wrist brace. What makes this legal is not that it doesn't attach to the pistol; it's that it is not a stock.

You could attach it to your pistol with a Velcro strap, epoxy, duct tape or whatever and it would not change its legal classification. But nobody wants to permanently affix a wrist brace to a regular pistol that is not, unlike an AR pistol or whatever, already bulky and unwieldy. That is why it doesn't attach to the pistol.

Otherwise, you could build an AR pistol with just a buffer tube, and carry a buttstock to slip over it. As long as you didn't insert the screw, it would not be attached. But that won't fly, will it? Think about it.

[Lloyd Smale]

my arm brace attaches to my 8.5 in AR pistol and is totally legal. It is not permanently attacked. I can pull it off by hand. But I can do the same with a standard collapsible AR stock too. By the way the shock wave arm brace does have a screw to attach it to a buffer tube and its still legal. What makes a wrist brace legal and not a stock is the wrist brace is just that, a brace to help you hold your handgun better. Like tracy said ITS NOT A STOCK. What you do with it after you install it is on you. bottom line is the batf spends way to much money trying to enforce the stupid gun laws we have. I think there finally seeing the light and are letting some of these things slide. they know an 7 inch ar15 with a wrist brace on it is harder to conceal then one without a wrist brace. that and how many mass shooters are going to choose a 7 inch AR or a glock with some but stock on it anyway. One things for sure though these arm braces, binary triggers, bump stocks, ect are all rolling the dice. If we get a democratic president or more anti gun fever in this country they could easily make them illegal and a guy would have to destroy many hundreds of dollars he spent buying the stuff. Heck the way I figure is if I can have fun this summer shoot a few thousand rounds out of the little gun ive had enough enjoyment to justify it right there.

Tom44. That device attaches to the pistol so it is NFA end of story

[mcdaniel.mac]

One word: legality.
If it were legal (sans NFA registration) to have a buttstock with a pocket that accepts the grip of a pistol, that is exactly what they would be selling instead of a wrist brace. What makes this legal is not that it doesn't attach to the pistol; it's that it is not a stock.

You could attach it to your pistol with a Velcro strap, epoxy, duct tape or whatever and it would not change its legal classification. But nobody wants to permanently affix a wrist brace to a regular pistol that is not, unlike an AR pistol or whatever, already bulky and unwieldy. That is why it doesn't attach to the pistol.

Otherwise, you could build an AR pistol with just a buffer tube, and carry a buttstock to slip over it. As long as you didn't insert the screw, it would not be attached. But that won't fly, will it? Think about it.

This device falls free if you're not holding it, it's not attached to the pistol at all. If you slapped a stock on the brace, it still wouldn't be attaching a stock to a pistol because nothing it attached to the pistol.

[35remington]

Doubtless nobody guarantees a one inch at fifty 1911 because nobody could provably do it on demand.....or they would be making the guarantee instead of lowering the bar to what they could actually do. A 3 inch at fifty 1911 is provably deliverable. A one inch is not.

WR, if you would care to shoot some groups and post them I will certainly take a look at them.

[W.R.Buchanan]

I got to the range late today and only got to shoot 3 mags thru the gun at the silhouettes. I was shooting off hand and kind of sucked. I was close most of the time.

3/10 on chickens at 50M and 2-10 on Pigs at 100M. Shot at dirt clods and rocks for the third mag and killed a bunch of them but they were all 25 Yards or less. Will show some groups when I get a chance to shoot the gun on paper. Do remember it is a Glock so don't expect too much.

I don't own a 1911 so I can't shoot groups with one.

As far as the 1911's I am not talking production guns although Les Baer does pretty well at his guns. A decent 1911 Gold Cup will easily shoot <1" at 25. But a custom 1911 Bulls Eye gun should shoot much better. There are plenty of 1911 Pistol Smiths out there that build these guns and the accuracy has to be better than 1" at 25 yards or they wouldn't be able to make any money.

Also they actually test these guns in a machine rest, not holding them in their hands. This is "mechanical accuracy," and removes some of the variables, then there the Ammo Variable which can be a very big variable indeed.

Randy