[98sr20ve]

Seems like the logical choice is the G34/35 vs the M&P. Longer barrel, longer site radius and longer history in the sport. But I am more drawn to the M&P. I like the way it feels. I also like the shorter barrel for occasional carry in cold weather. It just seems the Glock would have the advantage in the sporting side. However, people are starting to use the M&P despite the disadvantage of the shorter barrel. I know all about the lower bore axle but it still seems a properly setup Glock would have the advantage just because of the barrel. Am I over emphasizing the barrel length importance? Why are you choosing the M&P for "sport"? I am looking to get a IDPA/Production gun here soon and all the local people are using CZ/Glock guns in this category. I am going to get to try a G34 at the next event as well.

 

[M47_Dragon]

I use the M&P .40 for IDPA SSP. For me, it is mostly about ergonomics. Glocks feel terrible to me, and I don't shoot them any better than other guns I own. The M&P feels like a natural extension of my hand.

Sure, barrel length makes a difference, but in a sport such as IDPA where targets at 25 yards are not used in excess, I don't think it changes things too much. 4.25" does just fine at 3-15 yards, IMO.

 

[ToddG]

The extra barrel length isn't likely to give the pistol more mechanical accuracy. In fact, it's more likely the exact opposite. Shorter barrels flex less and tend to deliver better accuracy. The longer sight radius might matter if you're shooting bullseye at 50yd but at shorter distances I doubt it's really giving an advantage you can measure.



Glock has the benefit of more accessories, holsters, sight options, and modifications available.



The M&P has a wider ergonomic range.



Accessories, holsters, and sights for the M&P will arrive a lot sooner than replaceable backstraps, reversible mag catches, and ambi slide release levers will appear on Glocks.

 

[98sr20ve]

The extra barrel length isn't likely to give the pistol more mechanical accuracy. In fact, it's more likely the exact opposite. Shorter barrels flex less and tend to deliver better accuracy. The longer sight radius might matter if you're shooting bullseye at 50yd but at shorter distances I doubt it's really giving an advantage you can measure.



Glock has the benefit of more accessories, holsters, sight options, and modifications available.



The M&P has a wider ergonomic range.

OK, then why the holdout for the MP Tactical we have been teased with at some gun shows? Or, is it that the basic M&P is good enough to compete with the longer slide G34/35 and when/if S+W ever makes the Tactical it will be even better then the competition?

Accessories, holsters, and sights for the M&P will arrive a lot sooner than replaceable backstraps, reversible mag catches, and ambi slide release levers will appear on Glocks.

Thats very true.



Part of me is trying to talk myself into the M&P simply because it felt so good in my hand compared to the Glock.

 

[ToddG]

OK, then why the holdout for the MP Tactical we have been teased with at some gun shows? Or, is it that the basic M&P is good enough to compete with the longer slide G34/35 and when/if S+W ever makes the Tactical it will be even better then the competition?

My personal opinion is that the long-slide guns are more about marketing than performance. People will buy them because of a perceived improvement that isn't really there ... at least, not for 99% of the people who buy them.

Part of me is trying to talk myself into the M&P simply because it felt so good in my hand compared to the Glock.

A gun that fits your hand is going to help you a lot more than one that doesn't fit your hand but has a long slide.

 

[YukonGlocker]

I, and many others, are happy with the M&P in Production.

 

[coltman1985]

Most guys I see shooting a Glock in comp. are using the 17's and 22's. Not much barrel diff there! You will shoot well that which you practice with, you will practice more with a gun that "feels" good to you. JMHO.

 

[Vlad]

A longer barrel does make a difference in two areas. First, a longer barrel means a longer slide and a longer slide means a longer side radius. A long side radius does a allow for better aiming which leads to better accuracy, regardless of the barrel length. Second, a longer barrel allows for better/complete powder burn which means higher velocity with the same powder charge, which means making power factor with less powder which means lower recoil which means easier to shoot.



All that being said, I still prefer the standard length guns because I find the long barrel versions to be a bit slugish and I feel like I'm waiting for the sights to settle between shots. I know its in my head, but so is the rest of me, so standard length for me.

 

[ToddG]

A longer barrel does make a difference in two areas. First, a longer barrel means a longer slide and a longer slide means a longer side radius. A long side radius does a allow for better aiming which leads to better accuracy, regardless of the barrel length. Second, a longer barrel allows for better/complete powder burn which means higher velocity with the same powder charge, which means making power factor with less powder which means lower recoil which means easier to shoot.

I agree with both of those things, in theory. In practice, very very few people will actually gain a performance advantage at an IPSC or IDPA match because of those differences. As the saying goes, theory and practice are the same in theory, but not in practice.

All that being said, I still prefer the standard length guns because I find the long barrel versions to be a bit slugish and I feel like I'm waiting for the sights to settle between shots. I know its in my head, but so is the rest of me, so standard length for me.

Not in your head at all. Especially in target to target transitions, the extra size and weight of longer slides can make them slower (just like in trap & skeet). Glock addressed this to an extent by putting a lightening cut in their G34/G35 slides but I still know a number of people sho feel the guns are "moving more."

 

[Vlad]

Well .. I do think longer sight radius makes a difference. I just don't think that FOR ME it is worth the balance change. There's some dudes winning USPSA nationals titles with a long slide so clearly for some people it is worth it.



As for moving more .. My impression was that the slide took longer to cycle. In reality I don't think it did, but because of the longer slide, I was seeing more of the front sight moving around which created the illusion of a longer split. In all honestly my splits are not as fast as the gun cycle in either slide length so it shouldn't make any difference, but it does screw with my head which makes me over think the whole thing. A G34 sight radius is not much longer then a 1911 sight radius, and I have no problem with the cycling of a 1911. So I do think it is in my head.



But lets face it, in USPSA from B class up a lot has to do with your mental state and how you prefer things to be so no matter how kick ass a piece of gear may be for someone else, if it irks you then you are going to suck with it.

 

[98sr20ve]

Well .. I do think longer sight radius makes a difference. I just don't think that FOR ME it is worth the balance change. There's some dudes winning USPSA nationals titles with a long slide so clearly for some people it is worth it.

How many Glock people choose the 17 over the 34 when they have a dedicated "gaming" gun? Is it just a handful or is there really a split in the ranks as far as what people prefer?

 

[Vlad]

From the pool of people I know most of those that have a dedicated game Glock use a longslide, be it a 34 or 35.

 

[tigs40cal]

I'll have to agree the longer barrel should be better in a bulls eye comp. but for speed of target acquisition as needed in IDPA the standard length should be better. I shoot an M&P40 in IDPA and love it.

 

[98sr20ve]

I'll have to agree the longer barrel should be better in a bulls eye comp. but for speed of target acquisition as needed in IDPA the standard length should be better. I shoot an M&P40 in IDPA and love it.

If that is true, then why given the choice do Glock users choose the 34 over the 17. I know in my area that is true. Seems it's normally the case for others as well.

 

[tigs40cal]

[quote name='tigs40cal']I'll have to agree the longer barrel should be better in a bulls eye comp. but for speed of target acquisition as needed in IDPA the standard length should be better. I shoot an M&P40 in IDPA and love it.

If that is true, then why given the choice do Glock users choose the 34 over the 17. I know in my area that is true. Seems it's normally the case for others as well.[/quote]



Ah ,I dont know I dont have a glock. Just my 2 cents

 

[ToddG]

If that is true, then why given the choice do Glock users choose the 34 over the 17. I know in my area that is true. Seems it's normally the case for others as well.

Marketing?

Perception?

Self-image?

Flavor of the month?



Lots of reasons, few of which have to do with actual performance. The otherworldly status some people give to IPSC or IDPA competitors is just amusing. The vast, vast majority of them follow trends based on little more than a herd mentality. All you have to do is watch the sport over a decade or so and you'll see it.



Maybe there are some people who shoot the long-slide guns better. But for every one of those people, I guarantee you there are 99 who bought the long-slide not because they shoot it better, but because that one guy does and they assume that makes the gun better, period.

 

[Vlad]

I respectfully disagree, and so would most USPSA shooters I know. Some would even finding insulting. In fact, I would recommend you attend a few matches and get to know some of them. Sure, there are a few people who may just buy whatever someone else has, but for the most part most USPSA shooters I know experiment and search for the gun they feel most comfortable with. Sometimes that means they might try something that works for someone else, but saying that just trying something that works for others is just trying to be better by buying equipment is going a bit far. Would you just say that your students are just idiots for following your advice as an instructor?



Regardless of what you personally think of longslide guns, and I'm not fond of them myself, this year alone the top 2 of the 3 top CDP shooters where shooting longslide (or sorta longslide) guns and so was the USPSA production champion, and so was the one from last year, and the year before, and so on. These guys work VERY hard at being the best in their games and they do try to extract the last possible bit of performance out of their gear. If longslide slowed down their transitions, they wouldn't be shooting them.



edited: because a 21fs isnt a longslide like gun, my bad.

 

[ToddG]

In fact, I would recommend you attend a few matches and get to know some of them.

Um, I've been a USPSA member for almost 15 years, and I've been an IDPA member practically since the sport began. I've been to dozens of state, regional, and national championship matches. I might even have a trophy up on a wall somewhere.

I stand by my statement. The average D- or C- or Marksman- or Sharpshooter-class competitor is much more likely to follow the leader than determine what works best for him. It may be due to limited time, limited ammo, limited knowledge, or a combination of all three.



Here's an example: at the first IDPA Nationals, there was one person shooting a Beretta. That person was Ernest Langdon. Ernest did pretty well and over the next few years, Ernest and other Team Beretta shooters brought in many, many trophies from major events all over the country. And guess what? The number of Berettas at Nationals went from one, to a dozen, to about 1/3 of the people shooting in that Division. Then Ernest and the rest of that team left Beretta, Beretta stopped winning major events, and the number of people shooting Berettas dropped like a stone.



Reality.

 

[Rocket35]

Hello- new to the board here, but I hear that size doesn't matter as much as how you use what you got! :twisted:

 

[Vlad]

The selection of suitable handguns has increased dramatically in recent years. A lot of those new handguns have been designed and modified based on the performance and shortcomings found during competion. I don't find it surprising that newer designs have gained some traction while some older ones have lost some of their luster.



But perhaps I misunderstood you. It is my impression based on this thread that you believe that there is NO advantage in shooting a longslide ( except for very very few who all happen to win matches). Lets leave the maybe of the technical advantages aside and talk about the mental ones. Your signature includes "Attitude is everything!" and I'm assuming that you mean that in the context of self defance. On the other hand, confidence and a positive attitude is a critical aspect of competition shooting as well, competition is what this thread is about. Even if 99% of USPSA/IDPA shooters are herbivores following the bull with the bigger .. huh .. horns, if they lack confidence in their current platform their performance will suffer. Knowing that the bigger bulls choice of gear is the better one (even it may really not be for them in the long run) may increase their own confidence level with the same gear. If it is the wrong gear for them, sooner or later they will improve to the point that they can recognize that, or if it isn't then .. well they end up shooting gear that works for them.



I guess my point is that dismissing something as useless when it clearly work for some fairly talented people may be doing a diservice to other shooters. I'm only a lowly B class shooter, who even happens to prefer shorter guns, so what do I know.