9mm vs 45 Accuracy

[Donny1]

I went shooting with a friend Yesterday who has some fine guns. A Beretta 92 something 9mm and a Colt Mark IV. Don't ask me the details of what they are but both have had extensive work and are very smooth with nice trigger jobs. I don't own anything close and have no recent experience with these types of pistols so go easy on me.

I was wondering why I would do better with the 45. I would think the 9mm would be easier to control, I seemed to be pulling to the left, somewhat with both but more with the 9mm. As far as recoil there wasn't much difference.

Do these targets show I'm doing something wrong or do they look normal for the first time shooting them. They are at 25 ft.

The first pic is the 9mm



The next is the 45

[SnWnMe]

Most handguns can put the contents of one mag into one hole @ 8 yards. You seem to be pulling the gun with your weak hand in anticipation of recoil and that is causing your group to open up.

[Sinixstar]

First guesses would be trigger pull and differences in the ergonomics of the two.

The 92 is a DA/SA (Double Action if it's decocked, single-action after the first shot).
The Colt is a Single-Action only.

As such - the colt has a much crisper trigger with less travel.
The more travel you have in the trigger - the more likely you are to either pull the gun to the right, or push it to the left, as you pull the trigger. This is mostly a matter of how much finger you have on the trigger, and how precise your level of control.

Other possibility - is the amount of pressure your exerting on each hand. The beretta 92 feels like a bigger gun, which could cause you to tighten up more with your supporting hand. The Mark IV having a thinner single-stack grip - you probably feel like you can get a better grip with just your right hand, and aren't clamping down the left as much.

all of this assuming you're shooting right-handed.

Doesn't really say anything about the guns, the ammo, or even you - other than that they're different guns, and you don't have a lot of experience with it. Shoot 'em more, and you'll get a feel for what works and what doesn't.

[eaglemike]

Too many variables. It's not the difference in accuracy capability of the respective cartridges. You can get a very accurate 9mm and less-so .45, or vice versa. One gun might fit your hand better, you might see the sights better, the ammunition might be better for that particular gun, you might get a little more relaxed as you get used to shooting, remember good technique, etc.

ETA: best way to get better? Practice, practice, practice.......

all the best,
Mike

[Donny1]

In looking back I guess the 45 did fit my hand better. As far as trigger pull they both were about the same, 2-3 lbs.

[BamBam-31]

It's not just the pull weight, it's the difference in design. The Beretta DA/SA has a pivoting trigger action, while the 1911 has a straight back pull. Might not sound like much, but it does make a difference.

[damndave]

This should help

[Sinixstar]

In looking back I guess the 45 did fit my hand better. As far as trigger pull they both were about the same, 2-3 lbs.

It's not just the weight. It's the length that you have to pull the trigger back before it goes off.

With the colt - being single action only - there is no slack to the trigger. They're very crisp. Maybe a mm or two of travel and you're done.
With the beretta you have to pull the trigger back much further before the gun goes off. This is a basic function of the DA/SA concept. There's a lot more slack before the trigger engages.

It's when you start pulling the trigger on the DA/SA Beretta and you're taking up all that DA slack that things can get funny. The more slack there is the trigger, the more control you have to have over your movements.

[23 Blast]

For shooting two unfamiliar guns, that isn't too shabby, as far as your shooting goes. I have a Colt XSE 1911 and a Beretta 92fs, and for the life of me, I can't shoot my Beretta worth a damn. My Colt, however, is my best-shooting auto, despite .45 obviously having heavier recoil than a 9mm. A lot has to do with your personal ergonomics. The feel of a 1911 versus the feel of a Beretta is considerably different. I imagine if I practiced a great deal with the Beretta, however, I'd become accustommed to it and eventually be able to shoot it better, but for some reason, the short trigger reach of the Beretta messes me up.

[Call_me_Tom]

I carry a Beretta & shoot one in competition so I have a lot of practice with it. I also have a Colt 1911 which fits my hand better but I'm more accurate with the Beretta.

From looking at your target it appears that you are anticipating the shot. Practice makes perfect. No one can pick up a random gun & shoot it perfectly. You'll need to practice with it to become proficient. Even then, I'm a great shot with my personal Beretta but only good with my issued Beretta. Every gun is different even if they are the same make & model.

[Ed_in_Sac]

Finger probably fits the 1911 better. Could be a combination of grip size and trigger geometry/weight. Good trigger discipline will solve the problem on the 9mm.

[23 Blast]

I carry a Beretta & shoot one in competition so I have a lot of practice with it. I also have a Colt 1911 which fits my hand better but I'm more accurate with the Beretta.

From looking at your target it appears that you are anticipating the shot. Practice makes perfect. No one can pick up a random gun & shoot it perfectly. You'll need to practice with it to become proficient. Even then, I'm a great shot with my personal Beretta but only good with my issued Beretta. Every gun is different even if they are the same make & model.

I find this very interesting. Has your personal Beretta been altered or modified in any way compared to your issue gun? Or are they more or less both stock? See - I felt for a while that the Beretta I got (used) must be a lemon because I had always heard great things about their intrinsic accuracy. My CZ-75 has always been a wonderfully accurate pistol, but maybe that's due to it's superior (for me) ergonomics. Hmm.

[Sinixstar]

I find this very interesting. Has your personal Beretta been altered or modified in any way compared to your issue gun? Or are they more or less both stock? See - I felt for a while that the Beretta I got (used) must be a lemon because I had always heard great things about their intrinsic accuracy. My CZ-75 has always been a wonderfully accurate pistol, but maybe that's due to it's superior (for me) ergonomics. Hmm.

'inherit accuracy' is somewhat of a myth. The best you can expect out of phrases like that, is that fired from a vice with consistent ammo and no human interaction whatsoever - it will be consistent.

That does not translate to an 'accurate' gun though. Accuracy is all about the shooter, personal skill level, and personal preferences.

[Donny1]

Thanks for the input.

The 45 just all around felt better to me. As I said the recoil was not really any different and my buddy said that was because of about $700 work that was done to it. It was very smooth. But reading about the differences in the triggers make sense. I knew there was a difference but didn't know the mechanics of it. As far as "anticipating", I'm sure I was, but I can work on that.

All around a good learning experience. As far as finding something in a 9mm that has more of the feel of the 45, is there any makes/models anyone could suggest I try?

[orangeusa]

I find this very interesting. Has your personal Beretta been altered or modified in any way compared to your issue gun? Or are they more or less both stock? See - I felt for a while that the Beretta I got (used) must be a lemon because I had always heard great things about their intrinsic accuracy. My CZ-75 has always been a wonderfully accurate pistol, but maybe that's due to it's superior (for me) ergonomics. Hmm.

I THINK a trigger job is the main difference from stock... But I could be wrong... Call_Me_Tom will answer about his setup...

And I'm similiar - I shoot my 92 quite well (for me at least - not near as accurate at speed, tho!! ), but it took me a LONG time to get as good as with a 1911. Trigger is everything. And 1911 has an advantage in the SA trigger. But you can improve trigger on a stock 92 quite a bit without much work... Surprisingly, I shoot quite well with my Ruger P90, and it's all stock... I dunno.

23 Blast - PM me if you want to shoot one of my 92's - OnTarget in Irvine??

OP - I agree - recoil on 9mm 92 vs. 1911 in .45 (to me) seems about the same. Try shooting a .40 cal.. it's a little different experience..
Expect to pay up for a Springfield EMP 1911 in 9mm. But it shoots very nicely....

You are confusing rounds with completely different guns btw. It's not 9mm vs. 45. It's comparing a $2k worked over 1911 with a stock 92 (a combat pistol) that has had no rework if I read your thread properly.