Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Handgun Discussion
Is anyone else tired of the "My pistol isn't accurate" threads?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="D V US" data-source="post: 3816391" data-attributes="member: 34558"><p>I was doing an accuracy comparison one time with all of my .22 handguns. For semi autos I had a Smith 41, 1 each Hi Standard Citation and Trophy model, a Ruger government mkII and a mkIII with Volquartsen trigger system, and finally a Colt Woodsman Match Target. For revolvers I had 2 Smith K-22s, a 17 and an 18, a Colt Officers Model Match, a Hi Standard Double-nine and a Taurus 9 shot 22 that I had just picked up because a friend had one that I really liked. I was testing all with 3 different kinds of bulk .22 ammo to see how well they shot with the cheap stuff. Testing was done at 15 yards because my target dots were less than 1/4 inch and I couldn't see them any farther than that. As expected, all would put 10 shots under a 3/4 inch bullet hole paster at that range, except for the Double-nine. It needed a 1 inch paster. Then there was the new to me Taurus... and let's just say my cylinder bore shotgun printed better groups at 15 yards. Not exaggerating. The 24 inch square targets I was using would only catch 5 or 6 of the 9 shots coming from this thing. I said all that to say this... Sometimes, on very rare occasions, it really IS the gun.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="D V US, post: 3816391, member: 34558"] I was doing an accuracy comparison one time with all of my .22 handguns. For semi autos I had a Smith 41, 1 each Hi Standard Citation and Trophy model, a Ruger government mkII and a mkIII with Volquartsen trigger system, and finally a Colt Woodsman Match Target. For revolvers I had 2 Smith K-22s, a 17 and an 18, a Colt Officers Model Match, a Hi Standard Double-nine and a Taurus 9 shot 22 that I had just picked up because a friend had one that I really liked. I was testing all with 3 different kinds of bulk .22 ammo to see how well they shot with the cheap stuff. Testing was done at 15 yards because my target dots were less than 1/4 inch and I couldn't see them any farther than that. As expected, all would put 10 shots under a 3/4 inch bullet hole paster at that range, except for the Double-nine. It needed a 1 inch paster. Then there was the new to me Taurus... and let's just say my cylinder bore shotgun printed better groups at 15 yards. Not exaggerating. The 24 inch square targets I was using would only catch 5 or 6 of the 9 shots coming from this thing. I said all that to say this... Sometimes, on very rare occasions, it really IS the gun. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Handgun Discussion
Is anyone else tired of the "My pistol isn't accurate" threads?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom