My 1st. 9mm

[walnut1704]

Reading this thread and I come away with the feeling the 9mm is highly variable. My own experience is.

I'm really a revolver guy, but a couple of years ago it occurred to me that this whole semi-auto thing might catch on. Given it's popularity it seemed the 9mm was a solid choice. Lots of brass around and cheap factory ammo. Academy had a Black Friday special on a Taurus so I bought it.

Eh. Functioned flawlessly but not what I call match grade accuracy. I tried a bunch of powders, bullet weights, bullet diameters and it was O.K. for what it was. But it couldn't seem to do much better than a paper plate at 10 yards off-hand for me. After a few thousand rounds I decided I needed a better gun. Maybe something full-sized.

The next Black Friday gun was a Taurus 92. Another flawless functioning gun, but I just did not care for it much. Grip was kinda chunky. Shot a bit better than the first Taurus, but still couldn't hold a candle to my revolvers. Ran all the variations through it I ran thorough the first one, and then some.

O.K. let's quit fooling around. Maybe it's these economy guns. Bought a Springfield Stainless Loaded Target 1911. Shoots better than the Tauri but after 3,000 rounds I'm still not where I want to be. It holds it's own but I get these wild flyers that screw everything up. Even when I'm very careful and go back to basics with the single stage and hand-craft them in sorted brass.

O.K. maybe it's just me. So I run into a Kimber Gold Match II in .45. Let's see if it's me...nope, Kimber shoots like my revolvers.

So I have had zero functioning problems with bullets from 115gr to 147gr. I even shot some 150 SWC intended for revolvers through the Springfield to use them up. Fed flawlessly. Shot pretty much as well as anything. Which is not great.

So in my experience the 9mm with lead bullets is difficult (I haven't given up on it yet) to find an accurate load for. Of course that depends on your definition of accuracy. Maybe it's not fair expecting the Springfield to be as accurate as my Model 66...or 14...or 657. It seems close with jacketed bullets but I'm having quite a bit of trouble getting lead to shoot.

I have to ask myself, is it worth it?

[robertbank]

Yes but you might want to consider the type of pistol you are comparing your run at accuracy. Try a CZ SP-01 Shadow with a tuned trigger and you will get groups similar to your Springfield if not better. Use the same loads in a Glock with a factory trigger and you are back where you started.

In my opinion most of what you observe or read when it comes to shooting handguns is very subjective. A revolver with a fixed barrel and a decent trigger and sights ought to out shoot most pistols in pure accuracy. Why? Because a good number of pistols are designed to hit man size targets out to 25 yards. I am thinking Glocks, M&P FS, XD, and SIG 226/320 to name bit a few. These guns do well in Action Shooting and in self defense scenarios but are not designed out of the box to be target guns. An earlier poster comments about his experiences using his carbine out to 60 yards. His findings are his and they are valid where I, being an Action pistol shooter would never notice any difference in brass performance when shooting rapid double taps at 10 yards. Out to 25 yards the effect of brass on accuracy would not be near the factor the shooter is when it comes to shooting results. Heck I have problems seeing 2" black center of a target at 25 yards so asking me to place the sight within the 2" circle becomes problematic at best. If I shot a 2" group at that distance with any of my handguns I would be off to the lottery counter for a ticker on the next draw.

For most applications with guys who are out there plinking at tin cans and steel plates spend your time dry firing your pistol and less time worrying about the brass you use...particularly if it is 9MM and you are using a polymer framed gun. So to for self defense applications. You likely won't even use your sights if confronted with a BG seeking to do you harm at close distances. I hardly ever use them within 5 yards shooting IDPA. Darn sure I would not if it was for real.

Take Care

Bob

[tazman]

^^^^ I find this post to be very true. My revolvers are consistently more accurate for me than any of my semi-auto handguns with the exception of my target grade 1911 pistols.
The target 1911 pistols will shoot with the revolvers no problem.
My other semi-auto pistols(Springfield XD mod2 tactical, Springfield XD-E, Taurus PT92, and Beretta 92FS) with shoot nice groups but they are not the tack drivers the tuned 1911 pistols are.
I have no problems with cast in any of my 9mm handguns. Very, very few fliers and those can be attributed to the operator since the pistols are consistent.
I almost never have failures to feed or fire with my handloads and I shoot mixed brass. I might be able to improve my accuracy if I sorted my brass but it is doubtful since I am not a master class shot.
It has been several months since I last experienced a malfunction in any of my semi auto handguns. I have three that have never had a malfunction with over a thousand rounds fired in each of them.

[robertbank]

Ah Tazman, a man who knows his limitations. It comes with age and experience. I consider myself a good shot but not a great shot. In fact "great" and "Bob" are not often words found together except when she who knows best says "Oh GREAT Bob". There is a comma in there I think somewhere between the GREAT and Bob. LOL This usually comes right after I spill the sugar while refilling the sugar bowl. There are some things men should not have to do.

Take Care

Bob

[tazman]

I know most of my limitations. I have had them rubbed in my face often enough I should be able to recognize them. I have seen many people who can shoot much better than I can with handguns, rifles, and shotguns. A good portion of them were women.
I really wouldn't call myself a good shot. I think adequate would be a better term.
I used to be a really good archery shot until I got hurt. Not so much any more. Even in archery, there were many who were better than I was.
The reason I know my 1911 pistols are very accurate is I have had people who are great shots shoot them to see how they worked. It was pretty amazing. I wish I could do that with them.

[oldhenry]

Post them here !

I'm attaching a few photos of the completed GB500 project. These were taken with an old Sony Mavica (floppy disc). My wife took some with her Ipad of better quality, but I haven't figured out how to post them.

I hope this is OK with the management.

Henry

[charlie b]

Nice build. My first bike was a CB500-4.

Accuracy of 9mm semiautos is improving. I have not shot a specific group with my HK VP9 but it seems to shoot as well as my tuned 1911 (.45) and the Python. So far any target misses have been due to me, not the pistol. Will have to try a measured group next time I go out. I have also seen some Springfield XDm's that seem to be very accurate. Bullseye target type good? I don't know.

[RED BEAR]

I have always had at least one 9 mm. My absolute favorite is my old single stack single action firestar. A little on the heavy side but shoots like a dream and never had a single jam.