[Nalapombu]

Hey all,



Right now I have a G19 that I am aggravated with and am thinking of going with the new M&P 9 Compact. I am wondering what kind of accuracy can I expect from one? Any other details you want to add in the comparison of the 9C and G19 feel free, I'd like to hear them.



Thanks for the help and time.



Nala

 

[YukonGlocker]

They are way more accurate than most shooters.



What do you not like about the G19?

 

[modiecast]

Very...

 

[bchandler]

Not to judge you, but if you are disappointed with the g19's accuracy, it is more than likely your shooting technique. A new gun will not change that. The 19 is just as accurate as the Smith.

 

[tigs40cal]

the 9c is very accurate.i can put round after round in 1 inch group at 7 yds with wifes.and its a smith&wesson not one of those other things :wink:

 

[modiecast]

I disagree with your statement that if someone is not as accurate with a particular weapon that it is their shooting technique and not the weapon. While any weapon can be learned, why force that which does not come naturally or feel right. In another words, with the Glock 19 for instance, the grip angle and ergonomics are different than that of the M&P. For that reason, I "naturally" shoot the M&P better than the Glock. The Glock just doesn't feel right in my hands. With out concentration, I can consistently nail small groups with the M&P while with the Glocks it requires more concentration. Reading other Forum postings, I suspect many would agree that the M&P just feels better in the hand and that translates into better shooting. My point is, why force it. Go with what feels right.

 

[bchandler]

Actually, in a target shooting scenario, I disagree. If one takes the basic shooting principles, that is, holding the sights on the target and slowly squeezing the trigger until it breaks, the round will go center every time, no matter what gun you are shooting (assuming you have an accurate weapon). The problem comes in when someone gets too eager and squeezes off rounds too fast with not enough technique. Then, the more ergonomic gun may win because it has better natural pointability and therefore, follow up shop lineup.



I was simply saying that the inherent accuracy of the G19 is very close to the inherent accuracy of the 9c, meaning from a bench or someone who shoots both equally. A more ergonomic gun may mean faster learning and better from a point shooting standpoint, but really, as target guns, they will be equal if the user puts in the time to learn both. I've shot thousands of rounds through my G23, and am better with it than the 9c. But I'm sure when I've done that many through the 9c, I will be just as good with it.



I'm just trying to say, if you take a brand new shooter (for example), and give them a G19 and a 9c, they will not be very much more accurate with one over the other, since they haven't learned basic shooting techniques yet.



I am just trying to relate to the original poster, that since you seem "fed up" with the G19, it is possible that you simply have not put in the necessary practice to learn the basic shooing principles, since a very good number of shooters out there who have can get very good groups with the 19. I just didn't want you to make an investment in the 9c, thinking your shooting will instantly dramatically improve, and be disappointed when it does not.

 

[Walker]

I like to fire my 40 full sized more than my 40c, but after last week I believe my 40c is more accurate of the two...

 

[modiecast]

Actually, in a target shooting scenario, I disagree. If one takes the basic shooting principles, that is, holding the sights on the target and slowly squeezing the trigger until it breaks, the round will go center every time, no matter what gun you are shooting (assuming you have an accurate weapon). The problem comes in when someone gets too eager and squeezes off rounds too fast with not enough technique. Then, the more ergonomic gun may win because it has better natural pointability and therefore, follow up shop lineup.



I was simply saying that the inherent accuracy of the G19 is very close to the inherent accuracy of the 9c, meaning from a bench or someone who shoots both equally. A more ergonomic gun may mean faster learning and better from a point shooting standpoint, but really, as target guns, they will be equal if the user puts in the time to learn both. I've shot thousands of rounds through my G23, and am better with it than the 9c. But I'm sure when I've done that many through the 9c, I will be just as good with it.



I'm just trying to say, if you take a brand new shooter (for example), and give them a G19 and a 9c, they will not be very much more accurate with one over the other, since they haven't learned basic shooting techniques yet.



I am just trying to relate to the original poster, that since you seem "fed up" with the G19, it is possible that you simply have not put in the necessary practice to learn the basic shooing principles, since a very good number of shooters out there who have can get very good groups with the 19. I just didn't want you to make an investment in the 9c, thinking your shooting will instantly dramatically improve, and be disappointed when it does not.

I agree with your comments. In the end, we're both on the same page I think.

 

[jon_in_wv]

All lot of times the "fit" of the weapon makes a big difference in accuracy. If it just doesn't fit your hand you will have a much harder time shooting it accurately. My M&P fits like a glove and it is very accurate. I fired it back to back with a Glock 23 and my groups were 2 or 3 times larger with the Glock. I don't think the weapon was mechanically less accurate, it just didn't fit me right.

 

[elderberry99]

I give a plus 1 for bchandler's statement.

I have been shooting pistol competition for many years now and have shot many different weapons, good and bad.

Bottom line is if the weapon will do it's part, the rest is up to the shooter.

I had to qualify for my Concealed Carry permit some time ago and decided to practice with a friend that also needed to qualify but was not too good with the weapon he had. For about three weeks my friend and I would shoot side by side as he needed much practice in shooting his weapon and

I was willing to help him.

On the day before I was to qualify, the ejector broke on the weapon I was using at the time, and I did not have time to get it repaired for the qualification.

I called the range where I was scheduled to shoot and the instructor told me not to worry as he had plenty of weapons on site for me to use.

When I got there, the instructor handed me a Glock 21C in .45 caliber. Never holding a Glock much less shooting one made me a little nervous as it was no time to have a strange weapon when I was about to qualify for the carry permit.

Trying to make a long story a little shorter, I Took my first shot at the target and took notice where it hit. I was off center mass a small amount and made an immediate correction and took the rest of the course with ease.

Knowing how to compensate and recconizing how the weapon is printing on target makes all the difference in the world. Anyone can shoot just about any weapon within reason and do fairly well if you take the time to reconize how that weapon reacts to you.

As bchandler stated, it is a basic knowledge that will get you on targewt providing the weapon is doing it's job.

I now carry my M&P 9c concealed. That pistol will print very tight groups in a chest target at 3,5,7,10 and even 30 yards. I know 30 yards is a bit much but I wanted to know my limits with the M&P 9c. I love this weapon.

 

[Kraigster414]

I keep asking my M&Pc, how can I become as good a shot as you are?

 

[carteach0]

 

[elderberry99]

Nice shooting carteach0!

That is why I love my M&P 9c so much.

 

[Foofer]

Holy Cow. At 50 feet

That's awesome. You're tempting me to get a 9mm

 

[BonoVox]

Both are as accurate as you can make them with your abilities. It is not the arrow but the indian.